Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Adding keys remapping functionality #60

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Adding keys remapping functionality #60

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

gszadkow
Copy link

The data provider gives us the set of generic key-value pairs.
There is a need to have the keys remapped so that communication with applications relying on the influxdb and different key names is not broken

@repeatedly
Copy link
Collaborator

Sorry for the delay.

You can set tag_keys to tell which values are tag.
What is the merit of using tag_keys and keys_mapping combination?

@Jimilian
Copy link
Contributor

Jimilian commented Nov 30, 2016

@repeatedly, I.e. user pushes to Fluentd "someField", but InfluxDB expects that field would be just "Field". In this case keys_mapping could be used to transform "someField" to "Field".

Also I hope @gszadkow will provide some tests and example (for readme file).

@repeatedly
Copy link
Collaborator

For such cases, users can use rename_key or record_transformer/record_modifier plugins to rename fields.

@gszadkow
Copy link
Author

gszadkow commented Feb 17, 2017

record_transformer/record_modifier are filters
as I understand, the config structure is:

  • filter 1
  • match A
    -- store C keys x y z
    -- store D keys remapped x->a, y->b, z->c
  • filter 2
  • match B
    -- store C keys x y z
    -- store D keys remapped x->a, y->b, z->c

But we need to do different remapping within the same match for different stores
So remapping need to be done between the stores in the same match, not between the matches, where we can use the filters.

We cannot have

  • match A
  • filter
  • match A (again)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants