On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 2:10 PM, Peter Tribble <peter.trib...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 8:22 AM, adrian cockcroft > <adrian.cockcr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Don't write yet another performance stats collector / plotter, its been done >> to death. > > It may have been done to death; has it been done properly? > > I've been playing with most of the candidates. One of the reasons for doing so > is because I have in the past rolled my own and feel there must be a better > way, > and because the dreaded 'metrics' have cropped up again. > > What I'm finding is that each one does some things well. But none are > anything like > complete; all require considerable effort to make work anyway; and there's > major > investment required to fill in the gaps (or implement multiple solutions). > > Despite knowing that it's wrong, there's a distinct possibility that > we roll our own again.
Though in the context of the performance mib, I would say it's not that project. The goal of that is just to provide a net-snmp module that presents useful metrics that can be used by whatever poller / collector anyone wants to use. While SunMC had a lot of that, it's not open, questionable if it runs on OpenSolaris, at one point, Sun explicitly would refuse to release the MIB (that might have changed), and is not provided with the OS. _______________________________________________ perf-discuss mailing list perf-discuss@opensolaris.org
