2 ms·
Counting and grouping them is the opposite of what the article is arguing for. The whole point of the article is that you shouldn't be doing any aggregation and
by cortesoft 3y ago
Counting and grouping them is the opposite of what the article is arguing for. The whole point of the article is that you shouldn't be doing any aggregation and should be investigating each one individually.
- samus 3y agoBut TA also argues that people reach for these aggregation tools way too early. I'd say the author is honest enough to refrain from statement about Google scale because they haven't experienced it. There is value in keeping error rates down even at that level.
- cortesoft 3y agoSure, but the comment I was responding to was missing the point, because the article wasn't trying to convince people that ignore errors to record and aggregate them, they are arguing that people who record and aggregate errors should instead look at each one individually. Pointing out that errors should be counted is tangential to the argument at hand.