# Aren't these threads the very definition of "TAGS"?

**URL:** <https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/arent-these-threads-the-very-definition-of-tags/52213>\
**Category:** Ignition\
**Created:** [October 21, 2021, 3:48pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/arent-these-threads-the-very-definition-of-tags/52213 "2021-10-21T15:48:33Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![justin.brzozoski](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/justin.brzozoski/32/13452_2.png) [@justin.brzozoski](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/justin.brzozoski)\
**Post date:** [October 21, 2021, 3:48pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/arent-these-threads-the-very-definition-of-tags/52213/1 "2021-10-21T15:48:33Z")

</div>

If you go to the Ignition Gateway → Status → Threads, it gives you a list of which threads are currently running like a process list. It categorizes them all, and provides up top a graph of how much processing is being used by each category. There is a “Tags” category on the graph, but things like `tag-provider-default` and `tag-provider-MQTT Engine` are not in that category. They’re left “Unclassified”.

I feel like a tag provider would be the very definition of the sort of thing you would classify as “Tags”.

 ![thread_viewer](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/original/3X/0/5/05b7187e2b9cbdc2a16dc740c343e2c763cc67d9.png)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Kevin.Herron](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/inductiveautomation/user_avatar/forum.inductiveautomation.com/kevin.herron/32/7259_2.png) [@Kevin.Herron](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/u/Kevin.Herron)\
**Post date:** [October 21, 2021, 4:11pm UTC](https://forum.inductiveautomation.com/t/arent-these-threads-the-very-definition-of-tags/52213/2 "2021-10-21T16:11:22Z")

</div>

Yep, there’s plenty of missed opportunities for better thread classification. I’ll log this one.