-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24.7k
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
Upgrade t-digest and HdrHistogram library versions #92767
Upgrade t-digest and HdrHistogram library versions #92767
Conversation
Documentation preview: |
Pinging @elastic/es-analytics-geo (Team:Analytics) |
Hi @salvatore-campagna, I've created a changelog YAML for you. |
This test is already available in 'x-pack:plugin'.
We haven't upgraded to t-digest 3.3 because it changed the way it calculates the second quartile. For an even number of data points, it returns the (N/2)th element instead of an average between the (N/2-1)th and (N/2)th elements. This is different from what t-digest 3.2 did, as you can see from the changes you've had to make to the boxplot tests. We've considered this breaking, as it will cause aggregations to return different results than before the change. |
I left a note to that effect (although apparently lacking in detail) on the upgrade ticket: #73928 |
@not-napoleon yes I saw that but I am not convinced by the fact that this change is a breaking change. I mean, if the quantile (or percentile) is an estimation of the actual value....why should we consider that a breaking change? Moreover, why V7 compatibility test check the actual values returned? Should't compatibility be something about endpoints, parameters, formats...instead of the actual values returned? Especially considering that percentiles and quantiles are estimated? Also, most tests do calculations using a very low number of samples that probably makes results not meaningful. Am I wrong? |
Upgrade both
t-digest
andHdrHistogram
libraries to the latest version.