I am seeing some strangeness with the different rates... it seems like the m1, m5 and m15 rates are the wrong way around.
Metrics 3.0.1
Starting from a rate of 0 rpm, adding 60+ rpm (since the metric reporting involves a few requests per min)
timers:
{
http.requests:
{
count: 717,
max: 12.830905000000001,
mean: 0.08323803207810322,
min: 0.00041700000000000005,
p50: 0.0032900000000000004,
p75: 0.006025,
p95: 0.02296930000000001,
p98: 0.03605908,
p99: 0.9900917800000395,
p999: 12.830905000000001,
stddev: 0.8774492983815769,
m15_rate: 97.84780070301642,
m1_rate: 39.61643622214264,
m5_rate: 83.52638152649571,
mean_rate: 153.43836709106407,
duration_units: "seconds",
rate_units: "calls/minute"
},
Assuming the graph makes it through to the mailing list, you can see that the 15min average responds to the increased request load faster than the 1 min average which is slowest to respond.
After 5 minutes the m15 and m5 averages are the same:
timers:
{
http.requests:
{
count: 1073,
max: 10.389893,
mean: 0.034416146887159535,
min: 0.00041700000000000005,
p50: 0.002837,
p75: 0.004268500000000001,
p95: 0.019312649999999997,
p98: 0.026047239999999985,
p99: 0.034209150000000084,
p999: 10.388753155,
stddev: 0.5230684819414663,
m15_rate: 83.69251518764169,
m1_rate: 50.0368033558766,
m5_rate: 82.33652134806663,
mean_rate: 118.27674942776319,
duration_units: "seconds",
rate_units: "calls/minute"
},
Am I just mis-understanding these metrics or is there an incorrect constant in the exponentially weighted moving averages?
-Stephen