Odd parameter scheme for writePoints(), vs. the docs?

IMO the way parameters are passed to writePoints is a little odd, each point being an array of two objects, with the timestamp being a special field in the first object. This goes against the order specified in the Line Protocol docs, measurement,tag1=value1,tag2=value2 field1=value1,field2=value2 timestamp.

How about an alternative API, where a point can be an object instead of a 2-element array, with a key fields, and optional keys time and tags?

writePoints(measurementName, [
  {
    fields: {value: 123, otherValue: 456},
    tags: {foo: 'bar'},
    time: new Date()
  },
  {
    fields: {foo: 123}  // no tags or timestamp
  },
  {
    fields: 123  // automatically converted to value=123
  },
  [{a: 1}, {b: 2}],  // old school - unclear which is the field and which is the tag
], [options], callback)

[andyday]

seriesName !== measureName.

The name series is used in several places where the name measure should be used. For instance writeSeries with its current usage is misleading. A series is a unique combo of retention, measure, and tags. The way the writeSeries is used is more a write multiple points for multiple measures. It might be better to merge writeSeries and writePoints with the following usage:

writePoints([{
    measure: 'mymeasurename',
    fields: {
        field1: 123,
        field2: 234
    },
    tags: {
        tag1: 'mytag'
    },
    time:  Date.now()
}], ...)

To be clear there is no such thing as a series name only measure name.

[connor4312]

With completion of the write API in https://github.com/node-influx/node-influx/commit/0ef0889605cab3d323ff0b4cf4992757a60472d8 I’m closing this issue. Please feel free to take a read over the docs (and/or code) here and let me know if you’ve suggestions for improvement: index.ts#L540