“You cannot write to the same bucket you are reading from.”

Ah ha! Thank you for the quick reply!

We would much appreciate revisiting this decision. The protection aspect makes lots of sense now that I know the thinking. If said protection were possible at the granularity of a measurement instead of a bucket, this seems like a sensible revision.

In our case, it just feels a bit silly and overly complex to maintain one bucket for raw measurements and a second bucket for measurements containing derived calculations. If it were absolutely necessary I’m guessing we could live with it. But, I can already identify a handful of headaches this would cause when we update our own tools and other application configurations to use v2 down the road.