Hi there,
I am looking for a way to monitor the whole OpenStack environment including
physical servers as well as the network.
On every physical compute node is the Ceilometer compute agent installed,
right?!
1) Does the compute agent collect data of the physical machine as well or is it
just
On Thu, Nov 01 2012, Zehnder Toni (zehndton) wrote:
> On every physical compute node is the Ceilometer compute agent
> installed, right?!
Yes.
> 1) Does the compute agent collect data of the physical machine as well or is
> it just collecting data of the virtual machines?
Only virtual machines.
> On Thu, Nov 01 2012, Zehnder Toni (zehndton) wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 01 2012, Julien Danjou wrote:
>> On every physical compute node is the Ceilometer compute agent
>> installed, right?!
> Yes.
>> 1) Does the compute agent collect data of the physical machine as well
>> or is it just collecti
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Zehnder Toni (zehndton) <
zehnd...@students.zhaw.ch> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 01 2012, Zehnder Toni (zehndton) wrote:
>
> >> On Thu, Nov 01 2012, Julien Danjou wrote:
>
> >> On every physical compute node is the Ceilometer compute agent
> >> installed, right?!
>
> > Y
On Thu, Nov 01 2012, Zehnder Toni (zehndton) wrote:
> My goal is to offer monitored data to the admin and customers. The admin is
> interested in the utilization of the physical components and the virtual
> machines and the customer is interested to know what his VMs do or can do.
> It would be ni
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 2:13 PM, Julien Danjou wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 01 2012, Zehnder Toni (zehndton) wrote:
>
> > My goal is to offer monitored data to the admin and customers. The admin
> is
> > interested in the utilization of the physical components and the virtual
> > machines and the customer
Folks,
I'd like to add to this that physical server metering shouldn't be treated
differently in Ceilometer now that bare metal provisioning framework enters
into Grizzly. Physical servers will just become billable resources much like
VMs. I am not speaking of physical server monitoring here. Ju
> On Thu, Nov 01 2012, Julien Danjou wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 01 2012, Zehnder Toni (zehndton) wrote:
>> My goal is to offer monitored data to the admin and customers. The
>> admin is interested in the utilization of the physical components and
>> the virtual machines and the customer is interested
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 3:07 AM, Patrick Petit <
patrick.michel.pe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Folks,
> I'd like to add to this that physical server metering shouldn't be treated
> differently in Ceilometer now that bare metal provisioning framework enters
> into Grizzly. Physical servers will just beco
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 3:32 AM, Zehnder Toni (zehndton) <
zehnd...@students.zhaw.ch> wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 01 2012, Julien Danjou wrote:
> >> On Thu, Nov 01 2012, Zehnder Toni (zehndton) wrote:
>
> >> My goal is to offer monitored data to the admin and customers. The
> >> admin is interested in t
On Mon, Nov 05 2012, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> If we make the current compute agent take an option telling it which
> pollster namespace to use, then the same framework can load different
> pollsters. However, there is a fundamental security issue with
> communicating from an agent running inside a t
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 7:37 AM, Julien Danjou wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 05 2012, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>
> > If we make the current compute agent take an option telling it which
> > pollster namespace to use, then the same framework can load different
> > pollsters. However, there is a fundamental secu
On Mon, Nov 05 2012, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> When an image is deployed to bare metal, there is no container, right?
Ah, I see the confusion. There's 2 bare metal, I think, the ones run by
the the platform operator and the ones run to replace virtual instances
for any project.
I was actually talkin
> > On Mon, Nov 05 2012, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>> When an image is deployed to bare metal, there is no container, right?
> Ah, I see the confusion. There's 2 bare metal, I think, the ones run by the
> the platform operator and the ones run to replace virtual instances for any
> project.
> I was
On Tue, Nov 06 2012, Graf Lucas (graflu0) wrote:
> I'm a little confused now... ;) Is the bare metal run by the platform
> operator the physical machine? What do you mean with the bare metal
> run to replace virtual instances for any project?
AFAIU, bare-metal provisionning is about using hardwar
On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Julien Danjou wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 06 2012, Graf Lucas (graflu0) wrote:
>
>> I'm a little confused now... ;) Is the bare metal run by the platform
>> operator the physical machine? What do you mean with the bare metal
>> run to replace virtual instances for any pro
2012 11:00
> To: Graf Lucas (graflu0); Zehnder Toni (zehndton);
> openstack@lists.launchpad.net; Doug Hellmann
> Subject: Re: [Openstack] [ceilometer] Monitoring physical devices
>
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Julien Danjou wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 06 2012, Graf Lucas (g
On Nov 6, 2012, at 4:59 AM, Robert Collins wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Julien Danjou wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 06 2012, Graf Lucas (graflu0) wrote:
>>
>>> I'm a little confused now... ;) Is the bare metal run by the platform
>>> operator the physical machine? What do you mean with th
6 November 2012 11:00
>> To: Graf Lucas (graflu0); Zehnder Toni (zehndton);
>> openstack@lists.launchpad.net; Doug Hellmann
>> Subject: Re: [Openstack] [ceilometer] Monitoring physical devices
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:53 PM, Julien Danjou wrote:
>>>
19 matches
Mail list logo
