3 ms·

I'm guessing that using the DD event stream rather than purchasing logging support could be a cost saving, although not sure how DD would feel about that.

• RabbitmqGuy 7y ago
  errorship is not using the datadog eventstream to send all logs to it. Rather, errorship just sends exceptions, their stack traces(and a few other metadata like hostname) to the eventstream. > although not sure how DD would feel about that The datadog documentation[1] says; "An event represents any record of activity noteworthy for engineers"[1]. We certainly believe that exceptions that occur in engineer's applications are noteworthy activities and as such belong to the eventstream. 1. https://docs.datadoghq.com/events/ https://docs.datadoghq.com/events/
  • EdwardDiego 7y ago
    > errorship is not using the datadog eventstream to send all logs to it. Yep, noted that, and I like how you preserve syntax highlighting in the stack traces :) Out of curiosity, I've only ever dabbled in Datadog, is there any limit on event stream size or retention? I couldn't find anything mentioned in the docs.
    • RabbitmqGuy 7y ago
      I had also noticed the lack of mention in the docs, so I reached out to datadog sometime last year. Their response was that it doesn't have any limits or quota
      • tyingq 7y ago
        Interesting. Is there some disincentive that discourages it? Is it hard (or costly) to query, for example...compared to paying specifically for logging? Seems like a big loophole.