Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Splunk Exam SPLK-4001 Topic 2 Question 24 Discussion

Actual exam question for Splunk's SPLK-4001 exam
Question #: 24
Topic #: 2
[All SPLK-4001 Questions]

A DevOps engineer wants to determine if the latency their application experiences is growing fester after a new software release a week ago. They have already created two plot lines, A and B, that represent the current latency and the latency a week ago, respectively. How can the engineer use these two plot lines to determine the rate of change in latency?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

The correct answer is A. 64.

According to the web search results, the limit on the number of properties that an MTS can have is 64. A property is a key-value pair that you can assign to a dimension of an existing MTS to add more context to the metrics. For example, you can add the property use: QA to the host dimension of your metrics to indicate that the host is used for QA1

Properties are different from dimensions, which are key-value pairs that are sent along with the metrics at the time of ingest. Dimensions, along with the metric name, uniquely identify an MTS. The limit on the number of dimensions per MTS is 362

To learn more about how to use properties and dimensions in Splunk Observability Cloud, you can refer to this documentation2.

1: https://docs.splunk.com/Observability/metrics-and-metadata/metrics-dimensions-mts.html#Custom-properties 2: https://docs.splunk.com/Observability/metrics-and-metadata/metrics-dimensions-mts.html


by Valda at Jul 18, 2024, 05:48 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium SPLK-4001 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Sanda
2 months ago
Hmm, I'm torn between B and C. Maybe I'll just flip a coin and hope for the best. Or maybe I'll just go with the one that sounds the most complicated - that usually works out well, right?
upvoted 0 times
Peggie
22 days ago
Yeah, I would go with option B as well. It's important to make sure you're accurately calculating the rate of change in latency.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lai
26 days ago
I agree, option B is probably the best choice. It's always better to keep things simple when analyzing data.
upvoted 0 times
...
Toshia
27 days ago
I think you should go with option B. It seems like the most straightforward way to calculate the rate of change.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Emelda
2 months ago
Ha, I can't help but chuckle at the idea of just clicking a 'Change%' button. That's the kind of magical thinking I wish would work in real life. But alas, option D is clearly not the way to go here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arlie
2 months ago
Ooh, I like the sound of option C! Dividing A by B and then subtracting 1 to get the rate of change as a percentage. That's a bit more sophisticated, but I bet it gives you a clearer picture of what's going on.
upvoted 0 times
Nieves
1 months ago
User 3: I agree, option C seems like a more accurate way to determine the rate of change in latency after a new software release.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jacquelyne
1 months ago
User 2: Yeah, it does sound more sophisticated. I think it would give a clearer picture of how the latency is changing over time.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dalene
2 months ago
User 1: Option C sounds interesting. Dividing A by B and then subtracting 1 seems like a good way to calculate the rate of change.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Ollie
3 months ago
Hmm, this looks like a tricky one. I'm thinking option B is the way to go - creating a new plot C using the formula (A-B) and expressing the rate of change as a percentage. Seems like the most straightforward approach.
upvoted 0 times
Nieves
2 months ago
Yeah, option B sounds like the right method to determine the rate of change in latency. It's a straightforward calculation using the formula (A-B) and expressing it as a percentage.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cecil
2 months ago
I think option B is the best approach as well. It provides a clear way to analyze the difference in latency between the two plot lines.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gabriele
2 months ago
I agree, option B seems like the most logical choice. It's a simple way to calculate the rate of change in latency.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Alayna
3 months ago
Interesting point, Jaime. I can see how that approach might provide a different perspective on the rate of change in latency. It's definitely worth considering.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jaime
3 months ago
I disagree, I believe option C is better. Dividing the latencies and then subtracting 1 to express the change as a percentage seems more accurate to me.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alayna
3 months ago
I think option B is the way to go. Subtracting the latency from a week ago from the current latency and expressing it as a percentage makes sense.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel