Hi everyone, It is not possible for me to attend the summit and I would prefer if we waited until after the summit. My colleague Jonathan Le Lous, Cloud leader (OpenStack) at Savoir-Faire Linux, will be attending to the first three days of the summit. For those of you who are willing to talk, you may meet him there.
I will be attending to Solutions Linux in Paris (May 20-21), you may contact me to arrange a meeting there. I will also most likely attend to the next summit in Paris (Nov 03 – 08) where I plan to arrange discussions around the topic. In the meantime, I will shortly contact everyone subscribed to the blueprint to plan an IRC meeting. I will be posting more information about the meeting on openstack-dev as soon as we have settled on a date and time. Thanks, Alexandre Viau ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paulo Oliveira" <paulonascime...@av.it.pt> To: openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Cc: "alexandre viau" <alexandre.v...@savoirfairelinux.com> Sent: Wednesday, May 7, 2014 12:10:08 PM Subject: [openstack-dev] Monitoring as a Service Hello everyone, Me and my team have been following this subject and similar ones related to Monitoring. IHMO, seems to be very logical to aggregate monitoring with Ceilometer. Others have been working on similar features, like ICC Lab: Nagios/Ceilometer Integration and SNMP Support The best choice, is to enhance Ceilometer with monitoring features. Are you planning on talking about this on following IRC meetings? For further discussion. Best regards, Paulo J. Nascimento Oliveira http://about.me/pnascimento Advanced Telecommunications and Networks Group - http://atnog.av.it.pt Follow us - @ATNoG_ITAv From: Eoghan Glynn < egl...@redhat.com > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Monitoring as a Service Date: 7 May 2014 09:57:38 GMT+1 To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List \(not for usage questions\)" < openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > Hi Alexandre, I wanted to let this discussion develop a little before jumping in, as we've already had many circular debates about the cross-over between ceilometer and monitoring infrastructure in general. Personally I'm in favor of the "big tent/broad church" interpretation of ceilometer's project mandate, and would welcome further development of our capabilities in this area (whether directly within the ceilometer code-tree itself, or within a parallel repo aligned with the Telemetry program). In terms of furthering the discussion, unfortunately you've missed the boat in terms of securing a slot in the design summit next week in Atlanta (proposal deadline was April 20th, and the scheduling has all been finalized at this stage). However, we do have a project pod space available for ad-hoc overflow sessions. I would suggest that we organize something on this theme after the main ceilometer track[1] has completed, say on the Thursday or Friday. Please reach out on IRC to discuss availability for this and we'll work out something around remote participation. Thanks, Eoghan [1] http://junodesignsummit.sched.org/overview/type/ceilometer ----- Original Message ----- Thanks to everyone for the feedback. I agree that this falls under the Telemetry Program and I have moved the blueprint. You can find it here: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ceilometer/+spec/monitoring-as-a-service Wiki page: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/MaaS Etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/MaaS I can go over the project with you as well as others that are interested. We would like to start working with other open-source developers. I'll also be at the Summit next week. Roland, I currently have no plans to be at the Summit next week. However, I would be interested in exploring what you have already done and learn from it. Maybe we can schedule a meeting? You can always contact me on IRC (aviau) or by e-mail at alexandre.v...@savoirfairelinux.com For now, I think we should focus on the use cases. I invite all of you to help us list them on the Etherpad. Alexandre On 14-05-05 12:00 PM, Hochmuth, Roland M wrote: Alexandre, Great timing on this question and I agree with your proposal. I work for HP and we are just about to open-source a project for Monitoring as a Service (MaaS), called "Jahmon". Jahmon is based on our customer-facing monitoring as a service solution and internal monitoring projects. Jahmon is a multi-tenant, highly performant, scalable, reliable and fault-tolerant monitoring solution that scales to service provider levels of metrics throughput. It has a RESTful API that is used for storing/querying metrics, creating compound alarms, querying alarm state/history, sending notifications and more. I can go over the project with you as well as others that are interested. We would like to start working with other open-source developers. I'll also be at the Summit next week. Regards --Roland On 5/4/14, 1:37 PM, "John Dickinson" < m...@not.mn > wrote: One of the advantages of the program concept within OpenStack is that separate code projects with complementary goals can be managed under the same program without needing to be the same codebase. The most obvious example across every program are the "server" and "client" projects under most programs. This may be something that can be used here, if it doesn't make sense to extend the ceilometer codebase itself. --John On May 4, 2014, at 12:30 PM, Denis Makogon < dmako...@mirantis.com > wrote: Hello to All. I also +1 this idea. As I can see, Telemetry program (according to Launchpad) covers the process of the infrastructure metrics (networking, etc) and in-compute-instances metrics/monitoring. So, the best option, I guess, is to propose add such great feature to Ceilometer. In-compute-instance monitoring will be the great value-add to upstream Ceilometer. As for me, it's a good chance to integrate well-known production ready monitoring systems that have tons of specific plugins (like Nagios etc.) Best regards, Denis Makogon воскресенье, 4 мая 2014 г. пользователь John Griffith написал: On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 9:37 AM, Thomas Goirand < z...@debian.org > wrote: On 05/02/2014 05:17 AM, Alexandre Viau wrote: Hello Everyone! My name is Alexandre Viau from Savoir-Faire Linux. We have submited a Monitoring as a Service blueprint and need feedback. Problem to solve: Ceilometer's purpose is to track and *measure/meter* usage information collected from OpenStack components (originally for billing). While Ceilometer is usefull for the cloud operators and infrastructure metering, it is not a *monitoring* solution for the tenants and their services/applications running in the cloud because it does not allow for service/application-level monitoring and it ignores detailed and precise guest system metrics. Proposed solution: We would like to add Monitoring as a Service to Openstack Just like Rackspace's Cloud monitoring, the new monitoring service - lets call it OpenStackMonitor for now - would let users/tenants keep track of their ressources on the cloud and receive instant notifications when they require attention. This RESTful API would enable users to create multiple monitors with predefined checks, such as PING, CPU usage, HTTPS and SMTP or custom checks performed by a Monitoring Agent on the instance they want to monitor. Predefined checks such as CPU and disk usage could be polled from Ceilometer. Other predefined checks would be performed by the new monitoring service itself. Checks such as PING could be flagged to be performed from multiple sites. Custom checks would be performed by an optional Monitoring Agent. Their results would be polled by the monitoring service and stored in Ceilometer. If you wish to collaborate, feel free to contact me at alexandre.v...@savoirfairelinux.com The blueprint is available here: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/openstack-ci/+spec/monitoring-as-a-servi ce Thanks! I would prefer if monitoring capabilities was added to Ceilometer rather than adding yet-another project to deal with. What's the reason for not adding the feature to Ceilometer directly? Thomas _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev I'd also be interested in the overlap between your proposal and Ceilometer. It seems at first thought that it would be better to introduce the monitoring functionality in to Ceilometer and make that project more diverse as opposed to yet another project. _______________________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ 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
