On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 12:08 AM, Ladislav Smola <lsm...@redhat.com> wrote:
> Responses inline. > > > On 11/20/2013 07:14 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote: > > Responses inline. > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Ladislav Smola <lsm...@redhat.com>wrote: > >> Ok, I'll try to summarize what will be done in the near future for >> Undercloud monitoring. >> >> 1. There will be Central agent running on the same host(hosts once the >> central agent horizontal scaling is finished) as Ironic >> > > Ironic is meant to be run with >1 conductor service. By i-2 milestone we > should be able to do this, and running at least 2 conductors will be > recommended. When will Ceilometer be able to run with multiple agents? > > > Here it is described and tracked: > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+spec/central-agent-improvement > > Thanks - I've subscribed to it. > On a side note, it is a bit confusing to call something a "central > agent" if it is meant to be horizontally scaled. The ironic-conductor > service has been designed to scale out in a similar way to nova-conductor; > that is, there may be many of them in an AZ. I'm not sure that there is a > need for Ceilometer's agent to scale in exactly a 1:1 relationship with > ironic-conductor? > > > Yeah we have already talked about that. Maybe some renaming will be in > place later. :-) I don't think it has to be 1:1 mapping. There was only > requirement to have "Hardware agent" only on hosts with ironic-conductor, > so it has access to management network, right? > > Correct. 2. It will have SNMP pollster, SNMP pollster will be able to get list of >> hosts and their IPs from Nova (last time I >> checked it was in Nova) so it can poll them for stats. Hosts to poll >> can be also defined statically in config file. >> > > Assuming all the undercloud images have an SNMP daemon baked in, which > they should, then this is fine. And yes, Nova can give you the IP addresses > for instances provisioned via Ironic. > > > > Yes. > > > 3. It will have IPMI pollster, that will poll Ironic API, getting list >> of hosts and a fixed set of stats (basically everything >> that we can get :-)) >> > > No -- I thought we just agreed that Ironic will not expose an API for > IPMI data. You can poll Nova to get a list of instances (that are on bare > metal) and you can poll Ironic to get a list of nodes (either nodes that > have an instance associated, or nodes that are unprovisioned) but this will > only give you basic information about the node (such as the MAC addresses > of its network ports, and whether it is on/off, etc). > > > Ok sorry I have misunderstood the: > "If there is a fixed set of information (eg, temp, fan speed, etc) that > ceilometer will want,let's make a list of that and add a driver interface > within Ironic to abstract the collection of that information from physical > nodes. Then, each driver will be able to implement it as necessary for that > vendor. Eg., an iLO driver may poll its nodes differently than a generic > IPMI driver, but the resulting data exported to Ceilometer should have the > same structure." > > I thought I've read the data will be exposed, but it will be just internal > Ironic abstraction, that will be polled by Ironic and send directly do > Ceilometer collector. So same as the point 4., right? Yeah I guess this > will be easier to implement. > > Yes -- you are correct. I was referring to an internal abstraction around different hardware drivers. > > > >> 4. Ironic will also emit messages (basically all events regarding the >> hardware) and send them directly to Ceilometer collector >> > > Correct. I've updated the BP: > > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ironic/+spec/add-ceilometer-agent > > Let me know if that looks like a good description. > > > Yeah, seems great. I would maybe remove the word 'Agent', seems Ironic > will send it directly to Ceilometer collector, so Ironic acts as agent, > right? > Fair point - I have updated the BP and renamed it to https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ironic/+spec/send-data-to-ceilometer > > > > -Devananda > > > >> Does it seems to be correct? I think that is the basic we must have to >> have Undercloud monitored. We can then build on that. >> >> Kind regards, >> Ladislav >> >> > >> On 11/20/2013 09:22 AM, Julien Danjou wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Nov 19 2013, Devananda van der Veen wrote: >>> >>> If there is a fixed set of information (eg, temp, fan speed, etc) that >>>> ceilometer will want, >>>> >>> Sure, we want everything. >>> >>> let's make a list of that and add a driver interface >>>> within Ironic to abstract the collection of that information from >>>> physical >>>> nodes. Then, each driver will be able to implement it as necessary for >>>> that >>>> vendor. Eg., an iLO driver may poll its nodes differently than a generic >>>> IPMI driver, but the resulting data exported to Ceilometer should have >>>> the >>>> same structure. >>>> >>> I like the idea. >>> >>> An SNMP agent doesn't fit within the scope of Ironic, as far as I see, so >>>> this would need to be implemented by Ceilometer. >>>> >>> We're working on adding pollster for that indeed. >>> >>> As far as where the SNMP agent would need to run, it should be on the >>>> same host(s) as ironic-conductor so that it has access to the >>>> management network (the physically-separate network for hardware >>>> management, IPMI, etc). We should keep the number of applications with >>>> direct access to that network to a minimum, however, so a thin agent >>>> that collects and forwards the SNMP data to the central agent would be >>>> preferable, in my opinion. >>>> >>> We can keep things simple by having the agent only doing that polling I >>> think. Building a new agent sounds like it will complicate deployment >>> again. >>> >>> >> > >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
