On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 3:16 AM, Ildikó Váncsa <ildiko.van...@ericsson.com>wrote:
> Hi, > > I've started to work on the idea of supporting a kind of tenant/project > based configuration for Ceilometer. Unfortunately I haven't reached the > point of having a blueprint that could be registered until now. I do not > have a deep knowledge about the collector and compute agent services, but > this feature would require some deep changes for sure. Currently there are > pipelines for data collection and transformation, where the counters can be > specified, about which data should be collected and also the time interval > for data collection and so on. These pipelines can be configured now > globally in the pipeline.yaml file, which is stored right next to the > Ceilometer configuration files. > Yes, the data collection was designed to be configured and controlled by the deployer, not the tenant. What benefits do we gain by giving that control to the tenant? > > In my view, we could keep the dynamic meter configuration bp with > considering to extend it to dynamic configuration of Ceilometer, not just > the meters and we could have a separate bp for the project based > configuration of meters. > Ceilometer uses oslo.config, just like all of the rest of OpenStack. How are the needs for dynamic configuration updates in ceilometer different from the other services? Doug > > If it is ok for you, I will register the bp for this per-project tenant > settings with some details, when I'm finished with the initial design of > how this feature could work. > > Best Regards, > Ildiko > > -----Original Message----- > From: Neal, Phil [mailto:phil.n...@hp.com] > Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2014 11:50 PM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Ceilometer] Dynamic Meters in Ceilometer > > For multi-node deployments, implementing something like inotify would > allow administrators to push configuration changes out to multiple targets > using puppet/chef/etc. and have the daemons pick it up without restart. > Thumbs up to that. > > As Tim Bell suggested, API-based enabling/disabling would allow users to > update meters via script, but then there's the question of how to work out > the global vs. per-project tenant settings...right now we collect specified > meters for all available projects, and the API returns whatever data is > stored minus filtered values. Maybe I'm missing something in the > suggestion, but turning off collection for an individual project seems like > it'd require some deep changes. > > Vijay, I'll repeat dhellmann's request: do you have more detail in another > doc? :-) > > - Phil > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Kodam, Vijayakumar (EXT-Tata Consultancy Ser - FI/Espoo) > > [mailto:vijayakumar.kodam....@nsn.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2014 2:49 AM > > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > Cc: chmo...@enovance.com > > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Ceilometer] Dynamic Meters in Ceilometer > > From: ext Chmouel Boudjnah [mailto:chmo...@enovance.com] > > Sent: Monday, January 06, 2014 2:19 PM > > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Ceilometer] Dynamic Meters in Ceilometer > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Kodam, Vijayakumar (EXT-Tata > > Consultancy Ser - FI/Espoo) <vijayakumar.kodam....@nsn.com> wrote: > > > > In this case, simply changing the meter properties in a configuration > > file should be enough. There should be an inotify signal which shall > > notify ceilometer of the changes in the config file. Then ceilometer > > should automatically update the meters without restarting. > > > > > > > > Why it cannot be something configured by the admin with inotifywait(1) > > command? > > > > > > > > Or this can be an API call for enabling/disabling meters which could > > be more useful without having to change the config files. > > > > > > > > Chmouel. > > > > > > > > I haven't tried inotifywait() in this implementation. I need to check > > if it will be useful for the current implementation. > > > > Yes. API call could be more useful than changing the config files > manually. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > VijayKumar > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
