On 08/20/2014 09:25 PM, Chris Dent wrote:
On Wed, 20 Aug 2014, gordon chung wrote:
disclaimer: i'm just riffing and the following might be nonsense.
/me is a huge fan of riffing
i guess also to extend your question about agents leaving/joining. i'd
expect there is some volatility to the agents where an agent may or
may not exist at the point of debugging... just curious what the
benefit is of knowing who sent it if all the agents are just clones of
each other.
What I'm thinking of is situation where some chunk of samples is
arriving at the data store and is in some fashion outside the
expected norms when compared to others.
If, from looking at the samples, you can tell that they were all
published from the (used-to-be-)central-agent on host X then you can
go to host X and have a browse around there to see what might be up.
It's unlikely that the agent is going to be the cause of any
weirdness but if it _is_ then we'd like to be able to locate it. As
things currently stand there's no way, from the sample itself, to do
so.
Thus, the "benefit of knowing who sent it" is that though the agents
themselves are clones, they are in regions and on hosts that are
not.
Beyond all those potentially good reasons there's also just the
simple matter that it is good data hygiene to know where stuff came
from?
More riffing: we are moving away from per-sample specific data with
Gnocchi. I don't think we should store this per-sample, since the user
doesn't actually care about which agent the sample came from. The user
cares about which *resource* it came from.
I could see this going into an agent's log. On each polling cycle, we
could log which *resources* we are responsible (not samples).
Cheers,
Nejc
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
