>>> On 3/17/2008 at 10:44 PM, in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 17, 2008 at 03:39:05PM -0600, Brad Nicholes wrote: > >> In other words, the 3.1.x gmetad and frontend is able to acquire data from a > 3.0.x cluster and a 3.0.x gmetad and frontend is able to acquire data from > 3.1.x cluster. So the cluster by cluster migration from 3.0.x to 3.1.x > should > work just fine. > > could you confirm that the memory grid summary was reporting the right > value? > in both cases? > > what happens if you get both 3.0.x and 3.1.x with the same multicast > address?, > does it fail gracefully? > > Carlo
I finally got back to doing some more testing with the latest fixes for the summary reports and merging data from 3.0.and 3.1 clusters. Afaict, all of the reports for memory are correct. Both the 3.0 and 3.1 clusters can report into a 3.1 gmetad and it seems to be doing the right thing. If I put a 3.0 cluster and a 3.1 cluster on the same multicast channel, everything seems to work fine except that the 3.0 cluster tries to report the 3.1 nodes and can't, so you end up with some broken links on the summary page. However since the 3.0 gmond is able to listen to itself as well as any other 3.0 gmond on the same channel, it is still reporting valid data for its cluster when pinged by gmetad. The 3.1 gmond nodes just ignore the 3.0 XDR packets and continue to work as expected. Brad ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Ganglia-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ganglia-developers
