►
From YouTube: 2020-07-08 meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
A
A
C
A
C
C
C
This
notion
of
aggregation
is
not
something
that
we
have
today,
so
the
common
tag
from
from
from
the
table
basically,
would
be.
You
know
beneficial
in
my
view,
so
it
see
the
first
item
to
discuss
me,
the
second
one
we
it's
related
to
that
and
related
to
the
table
base.
Simply
as
our
friend
has,
which
is
you
know,
the
notion
of
his
pain,
ravaging.
A
B
B
C
C
B
A
You
know,
like
you'd,
also
have
to
consider
how
do
you
keep
the
tenants
from
right?
You
know
like
the
noisy,
neighbor
problem
and
things
like
that
right.
Keeping
the
tenants
from
impacting
other
tenants,
yeah
something
up.
Chris
I
haven't
really
thought
about
it.
I
know,
I
mean
I,
don't
think
anything
you
might
hear
on
the
sprink
side
has
really
thought
about
it.
As
far
as
on
there.
C
C
That
I
think
it
was
a
scaly,
is
here
he's
getting
out
saying
that
everybody
saying
anything
that
was
a
touch
of
the
pure
his
proposal
was
was
very
close
to
what
Ana
has,
but
one
of
the
comments
there
was.
It
will
be
more
of
it
to
have
a
load
balancing
in
front
of
abenomics
reflector
so
that
this
one
so
then
the
direct
disband
or
you
know,
basic
electricity-
would
direct
you
to
a
set
of
collectors.
C
B
C
Looking
for
this
meeting
here
is
some
sort
of
confirmation
that
we
need,
or
it
will
be
interested
to
have
those
three
capabilities
in
the
collector.
One
is
the
ability
to
route
spans.
The
second
is
the
notion
of
variation
expands.
It
traces
and
the
third
would
be
a
dementia
tenancy.
So
if
those
are
three
capabilities
that
we
want
then
I'm
circling
start
doing,
it
shows
around
was
very
specific
interest.
C
B
Yeah
I
got
a
couple
of
questions.
I
was
working
on
fixing
the
Zipkin
translations
and
notice
that
it
was
still
using
the
open
census
format
rather
than
the
internal
o
OT
LP
format,
so
I'm
gonna
switch
that
over
and
then
that
another
thing,
I
noticed
or
discovered,
I
didn't
think
about
was
in
the
protocol
itself,
there's
no
flag
saying
whether
sampled
or
not
so
I'm,
assuming
that
the
the
the
assumption
was
that
you
would
never
send
traces
that
are
never
sample
or
not
sampled,
so
you
can
automatically
assume
it's
been
sampled.
B
B
B
B
D
B
Ok
off
to
look
at
that,
so
you're
saying
something
the
SDKs
got
to
implement
it.
That
way,
I
believe
so.
I
couldn't
look
at
that
yeah.
Well,
that
makes
sense,
but
we'd
have
to
make
sure
you
know.
If
that
was
gonna,
be
the
case.
We'd
have
to
make
sure
it's
like
there's
a
spec
that
specifies
that
and
then
all
the
SDKs
implemented
or
else
you'd
get
inconsistent
behavior
weight.
B
D
B
It's
in
the
trace,
it's
in
the
trace
parent
on
the
header,
so,
while
you're
propagating
yeah
it
gets
sent,
but
it's
increase
parent.
It's
not
true
state
got
you
so
you're,
basically,
jumping
back
and
forth
there
if
you're
expecting
it
internally
and
the
open
tormentor
protocol
to
ship
it
in
the
tri-state.