Peter Tribble wrote: > On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 5:29 AM, Mike Gerdts <mgerdts at gmail.com> wrote: >> Or rrdtool consumes the data instantly, but the raw data is kept >> around for a bit. > > You're heading a little further than I was originally. I was originally only > looking at the very bottom layer of the stack - just dumping enough raw > data both regularly enough and sufficiently completely that a range of > higher-level tools had something to chew on. > > My experience here is that munging data into rrd is relatively expensive, > at least on the scale we're looking at here. I suspect that for rrd collection > you would have to identify the subset of statistics of interest, and just keep > those. Or are you suggesting we rrd everything? (That won't work for any > meaningful definition of everything: just consider the I/O statistics for NFS > mounts in an environment with an active automounter.) And if just a > subset, can we identify that?
First off, I don't want a subset. I want everything of value we can gather. Your comments on load and difficulty are adding to Mike's about what rrd does to the data to make me like it less and less. Secondly, I was only debating the rrd usefulness as an on-disk storage format, since the comment was made that text would get overly large and expensive to parse. But yes, we should probably focus first on what to collect and how to get it. Rainer -- Mind the gap. http://www.dragonhearth.com/blogs/rheilke
