> Moving parts should either provide value or be obliterated from our source > tree.
I generally agree. In this particular case it's still unclear to me - in the absence of Thermos CLI and Observer, how do we conduct live site executor/thermos troubleshooting? On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Bill Farner <wfar...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> I think we would be better served by advertising it as an >> optional component that provides operators and users with debugging >> ability. > > > Slightly tangential discussion, but i think we should be very skeptical of > fringe components. Moving parts should either provide value or be > obliterated from our source tree. > > -=Bill > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 6:51 PM, Zameer Manji <zma...@apache.org> wrote: > >> One thing I would like to point out is the thermos CLI is not required for >> Aurora operation. I think we would be better served by advertising it as an >> optional component that provides operators and users with debugging >> ability. >> >> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 6:38 PM, Joseph Smith <yasumo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > I believe it absolutely is- ideally as we deprecate the Observer, we can >> > then lean on the Mesos Slave for this information instead. This will >> > further decrease the number of moving pieces, simplifying the operation >> of >> > an Aurora/Mesos cluster. >> > >> > > On Feb 17, 2015, at 6:33 PM, Zameer Manji <zma...@apache.org> wrote: >> > > >> > > Joe, >> > > >> > > If I understand Brian's proposal correctly < >> > > >> > >> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/aurora-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAFTdr0DZvH21tR=NLK0qP-Y9-oL9SyULy6GLah=capuw0sv...@mail.gmail.com%3E >> > >, >> > > we are going to depreciate the Observer. This combined with your >> proposal >> > > will make the executor the only component that can read the thermos >> > > checkpoints and produce some output that is human readable. Is that >> > > something we want to do? >> > > >> > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Joseph Smith <yasumo...@gmail.com> >> > wrote: >> > > >> > >> Hi everyone, >> > >> >> > >> After reviewing the functionality offered by the Thermos Commandline >> > tool >> > >> vs. what’s exported via the Thermos Observer, I was hoping to bring >> up a >> > >> question I had: >> > >> >> > >> Can we deprecate the Thermos CLI? >> > >> >> > >> Removing this would decrease the number of components required for a >> > >> functional Aurora installation (a huge victory, in my opinion) and >> also >> > >> enable the Observer to fully take over the duty of providing >> visibility >> > >> into what’s running on a most. In addition, maintenance is performed >> via >> > >> the HostMaintenance API < >> > >> >> > >> https://github.com/apache/incubator-aurora/blob/master/src/main/python/apache/aurora/admin/host_maintenance.py#L26 >> > > >> > >> and should not be done using thermos kill, which would cause LOST >> tasks. >> > >> >> > >> That said, removing this tool makes it much more difficult for Thermos >> > to >> > >> be used as a monit <http://mmonit.com/monit/> replacement, which is >> > >> actually rather feasible now. In addition, it also forces people to >> > >> remember + learn the port the Observer is running on in order to get >> > >> information about tasks. >> > >> >> > >> Any thoughts and opinions would be much appreciated! >> > >> >> > >> Thanks! >> > >> Joe >> > >> >> > >> -- >> > >> Zameer Manji >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > -- >> > Zameer Manji >> > >> > >>
