Brad Nicholes wrote:
On 12/5/2007 at 11:33 AM, in message
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Millar
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Thursday 29 November 2007 00:09:20 Brad Nicholes wrote:
>> [...]
>>> TN="81296" TMAX="180" DMAX="0" SLOPE="both" SOURCE="gmond">
>>> By default the
Hi Brad:
On 12/5/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We could. I just thought that it might be easier for the web frontend if it
> didn't have to worry about whether the TITLE existed or not and could just
> count on it being there. I am guessing that moving forward an alternate us
>>> On 12/5/2007 at 11:33 AM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Paul Millar
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thursday 29 November 2007 00:09:20 Brad Nicholes wrote:
> [...]
>> > > > TN="81296" TMAX="180" DMAX="0" SLOPE="both" SOURCE="gmond">
>> >
>> >
>>
>> By default the is the same as the metric
I think structure of XDR packet should be changed, because order of
attributes is not guaranteed. In my opinion, most information should be
moved into separate element subnode of parent node, rather than
stored as an attribute of the element.
regards,
Khaz Sapenov
R&D Enomaly Labs
On Nov 28, 2007
Hi Brad:
On 11/28/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> By default the is the same as the metric name. However if
> you add a Title="blah" to any Metric{} block in gmond.conf file, that title
> is reflected in the tag. This way the user is able to
> name their own graphs and const
>>> On 11/28/2007 at 3:41 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bernard Li"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Brad:
>
> On 11/21/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Calling for PHP web frontend help!
>> With the introduction of additional metadata, there is some work that
> needs to
Hi Brad:
On 11/21/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Calling for PHP web frontend help!
> With the introduction of additional metadata, there is some work that needs
> to be done to the web frontend. I am not a PHP hacker and I know that many
> of you are, so I am asking for help
Hi Brad:
On 11/27/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I attempted to update the man pages but wasn't quit sure how. I haven't
> dealt with man pages much.
It's pretty straightforward, just edit gmond/conf.pod.
You could also just post the text here and I'll put it in.
Cheers,
Ber
>>> On 11/27/2007 at 4:36 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bernard Li"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Brad:
>
> On 11/27/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > BTW, shouldn't I see multicpu entries when I click on Gmetrics?
>> > Currently there is nothing.
>> >
>>
>> No, you sho
Hi Brad:
On 11/27/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > BTW, shouldn't I see multicpu entries when I click on Gmetrics?
> > Currently there is nothing.
> >
>
> No, you should see CPU utilization graphs for each cpu on the system. By
> default the multicpu.conf file only enables cpu0.
>>> On 11/27/2007 at 4:07 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bernard Li"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Brad:
>
> On 11/27/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure yet what is causing this but I have patched the code to prevent
> it from happening. The current code was
Hi Brad:
On 11/27/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure yet what is causing this but I have patched the code to prevent
> it from happening. The current code was existing gmond if an invalid spoof
> message was detected. There is not reason why it needs to exit. Just ig
>>> On 11/27/2007 at 1:05 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bernard Li"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Brad:
>
> On 11/26/07, Bernard Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Only info I have now is that the location used to be hidden but now
>> it's being displayed (with 'unspecified' info). Will
Hi Brad:
On 11/26/07, Bernard Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Only info I have now is that the location used to be hidden but now
> it's being displayed (with 'unspecified' info). Will drill down into
> this later. BTW, gmond crashed again, I'll setup gdb to see if I can
> get a backtrace...
H
>>> On 11/26/2007 at 5:23 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bernard Li"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Brad:
>
> On 11/26/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure. What was hiding it before? I also noticed that heartbeat was
> showing up as a graph. Both of these hav
Hi Brad:
On 11/26/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure. What was hiding it before? I also noticed that heartbeat was
> showing up as a graph. Both of these have to be coming through in the XML.
> The only thing that I can think of is that the SOURCE attribute in the X
>>> On 11/26/2007 at 4:37 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bernard Li"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Brad:
>
> On 11/26/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I ran into this error before. I was due to an uninitialized XDR packet.
> Basically get gmond that receives the packet
Hi Brad:
On 11/26/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I ran into this error before. I was due to an uninitialized XDR packet.
> Basically get gmond that receives the packet is looking for the spoof packet
> id so that it can read the packet correctly. If you have a gmond running
>>> On 11/26/2007 at 4:08 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Bernard Li"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Okay -- may have a bug with the latest code in trunk causing gmond to crash:
>
> Nov 26 13:03:08 server01 GMOND[14953]: Incorrect format for spoof
> argument. exiting.
>
> This happens about 20
Okay -- may have a bug with the latest code in trunk causing gmond to crash:
Nov 26 13:03:08 server01 GMOND[14953]: Incorrect format for spoof
argument. exiting.
This happens about 20 mins after gmond was started -- any ideas?
Cheers,
Bernard
On 11/26/07, Bernard Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi all:
The latest Ganglia snapshot is available here:
http://www.ganglia.info/snapshots
This includes Brad's recent XDR refactoring work.
Any problems, please post back here.
Cheers,
Bernard
On 11/26/07, Bernard Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Brad:
>
> On 11/26/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL
Hi Brad:
On 11/26/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, which is why I wanted to get it into 3.1.0 before we released anything
> official. The packets that are being sent between gmond's are significantly
> different which means that any older version of gmond will not understa
Yes, which is why I wanted to get it into 3.1.0 before we released anything
official. The packets that are being sent between gmond's are significantly
different which means that any older version of gmond will not understand this
new packet structure. The XML content that is produced by gmo
Hi Brad:
I just tested SVN r883 and it seems that the new gmond can no longer
see older versions of gmond (prior to the XDR refactoring) -- is this
an expected behaviour?
Thanks,
Bernard
On 11/21/07, Brad Nicholes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I have just merged the monitor-core-XDR-refactor
I have just merged the monitor-core-XDR-refactor branch back into trunk.
The work that was done in the branch touched a lot of the core functionality of
gmond, gmetad and gmetric.
First of all, this new code has refactored the XDR packets by splitting them
into value packets and metadat
25 matches
Mail list logo
