Spelling #7507
Spelling #7507
Conversation
| @@ -767,7 +767,7 @@ FROM | |||
| rgwg.total_queued_request_count AS "Queued Request Count", | |||
| rgwg.total_cpu_limit_violation_count AS "CPU Limit Violation Count", | |||
| rgwg.total_cpu_usage_ms AS "CPU Usage (time)", | |||
| ' + CASE WHEN SERVERPROPERTY('ProductMajorVersion') > 10 THEN 'rgwg.total_cpu_usage_preemptive_ms AS "Premptive CPU Usage (time)",' ELSE '' END + ' | |||
| ' + CASE WHEN SERVERPROPERTY('ProductMajorVersion') > 10 THEN 'rgwg.total_cpu_usage_preemptive_ms AS "Preemptive CPU Usage (time)",' ELSE '' END + ' | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@Trovalo This pull request contains general spelling corrections, would you be able to verify this change and the others in the sqlserver plugin?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I will have a better look at it, but after a quick look, I've noticed that some of those corrections will actually change the existing measurements, by writing values to a different field key, or by changing a tag value. Of course, this could cause problems in reports or whatever is built on top of those data.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd be happy to split off those (especially if you could identify them) into a distinct PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If the field/tag key were spelled incorrectly, we aren't so strict that we would leave them even though strictly speaking it can cause issue with existing reports. For example the total_elasped_time_ms -> total_elapsed_time_ms we ought to fix.
Could be good to identify the exact changes for the changelog or release notes though. Let's split out the sqlserver.go file into a separate pr?
jsoref
force-pushed
the
spelling
branch
2 times, most recently
from
592aa11 to
5678cf7
Compare
Misspellings identified by the check-spelling action.
Follow-up to #7492 - the risky parts
Required for all PRs:
Signed CLA.
Associated README.md updated. -- I'm going to wait for someone to review this before I take this step. Note that CONTRIBUTING.md makes no mention of this.
Has appropriate unit tests. -- Not included, but available (note that it wouldn't be a make thing, although I suppose I could create a Docker for it... that seems pretty doable -- people have asked for a way to do that...):
It reported: jsoref@25d89f6#commitcomment-39074475
And it validated that the changes in this PR made it happy: jsoref@95180ce
Some projects like to rebase, some to squash, some ask for things to be split up. I try to avoid doing anything until a reviewer provides direction. It's much easier for me to initially work with individual commits (e.g. there are some en-US commits here, if you tell me your project is en-GB, I can easily drop them today, but if I squash eagerly, then disentangling them can be painful). I'm happy to make changes/follow directions within reason.