Replies: 3 comments 7 replies
-
|
You are right, that the At the end I decided to keep it as it is right now... Just to get some rest in this topic - so that the users don't have the need to adopt to all the changes again and again... When we need to further reduce the size, then I would replace the |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Oh, btw, with 2025.12.4 I seem to be getting -15 (and not 15) as deltas_in_minutes: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Frohe Ostern! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.

Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
In the description for 2025.12.1 your are giving this example for the new structure:
{ "range": { "start_utc": "2025-12-05T23:00:00+00:00" "deltas_in_minutes": [15, 15, 15, 15] "values": [0, 1, 2, 3, 4] } }Since the field name is
start_utcone could scratch the tz information from the timestamp itself:{ "range": { "start_utc": "2025-12-05T23:00:00" "deltas_in_minutes": [15, 15, 15, 15] "values": [0, 1, 2, 3, 4] } }What do you think? One could also argue that the most flexibel version is to name the field
startand keep the tz information in the timestamp. Then there would be the chance to be able to handle other timezones...Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions