> Can you layout the differences for those of us who haven't > spent as much time looking at this as you?
Sure. But how long do you think I've been looking at it ? (rhetorical) ;) > From what you are saying, if a monitor has a metric that > isn't filled in by a service, it sits empty. And if a > service has a metric that wasn't setup with the monitor, it > can't be monitored. The primary benefit to driving the setup > through the monitor service is associations between the metrics? Yes. The benefits of driving the setup through the monitor service are that the services do not need to know what the hierarchy is and they do not need to know about any relationships that cause updates to metric values to be propagated to any ancestors in tree. All they need to know is the name of the set to update. > As I understand it, configuring a new metric would mean > writing the code in the service, and then configuring the > service monitor, which is really defining the registry. Is > that correct? Yes. Steve --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
