Le 2016-10-04 18:09, gordon chung a écrit :
On 04/10/2016 11:58 AM, Tim Bell wrote:
What would be the impact for Heat users who are using the Ceilometer
scaling in their templates?
Tim
pretty big. :/
The use-case itself is still supported.
Using Ceilometer alarming or Aodh alarming is transparent from the Heat
template point of view, Heat already does the API calls to endpoint
found in Keystone.
For the storage, Heat users can move their storage to Gnocchi and
updates their templates to create in Aodh, Gnocchi alarms instead of
legacy Ceilometer alarms.
I agree with gordc, this is not a light change. But well the old
Ceilometer storage don't work at scale, each alarm evaluation take a lot
of times and CPU to retrieve statistics from the old storage, while it's
very quick when Gnocchi is used.
Keeping the old storage system for the autoscaling use-case doesn't make
sense to me.
Also we have a integration gating job that tests the
Heat+Ceilometer+Aodh+Gnocchi since two cycles. While the previous/legacy
Ceilometer scaling system never had functional/integration tests.
--
Mehdi Abaakouk
mail: sil...@sileht.net
irc: sileht
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
