HackerTrans
トップ新着トレンドコメント過去質問紹介求人

patty_pie

no profile record

コメント

patty_pie
·4 か月前·議論
Yeah, the double-application risk is subtle and very easy to miss until someone reruns a restatement and wonders why the numbers shifted. A correction history table with an applied_to_range column would cover it. Good tool, looking forward to seeing it develop further.
patty_pie
·4 か月前·議論
The per-service calibration factor is the right call — blended totals are useless for attribution. Curious how stable your factors are over time though. In our experience, volume discounts and reserved capacity shift the multiplier enough month-to-month that historical restating becomes a moving target. Are you versioning the calibration factors, or just applying the latest one when you restate?