[DX-885] Addresses conflation discoverability docs gap#3231
Conversation
|
Important Review skippedAuto reviews are disabled on this repository. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the You can disable this status message by setting the Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
24896b4 to
4ed678e
Compare
4ed678e to
83124b1
Compare
|
|
||
| Consider enabling conflation when: | ||
| - A channel receives frequent updates (even as low as 2-3 messages per second with the same conflation key) and consumers only need the latest value. | ||
| - Your use case involves streaming prices, sensor readings, location coordinates, or other continuously-updating values. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
All of these are dependent on the point above - either every value is important, or it isn't. It doesn't matter if you're streaming prices, if every message is important you wouldn't use conflation.
Do we need to word this as example use-cases?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
fair, removed this bullet point altogether. The others make the case we want to make
| - You want to reduce message delivery volume and associated costs. | ||
|
|
||
| <Aside data-type='important'> | ||
| Conflation discards intermediate messages. Within each conflation interval, only the last message for each conflation key is delivered to subscribers. All earlier messages within that window are permanently dropped. They are not stored, not available via history, and cannot be recovered. Do not use conflation for data where every message matters, such as chat messages, transaction events, or ordered commands. |
21d0583 to
4583450
Compare
Description
Addresses conflation discoverability docs gap as per the llm-eval docs audit
Checklist