[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All,
a swiss consultancy has implemented a native windows gmond, and the
binaries
are in the public domain and free. Follow the trail here:
http://aprconsulting.ch/product.htm
I believe they are also offering ganglia consulting, support, and
customisations for a fee.
This daemon is much better because of the extra metrics, and because it
is a native
windows service. With the existing gmond, missing or zero metrics were
actually cygwin's fault,
not gmond.
These are the extra metrics they have compared to the gmond-cygwin one:
name = "proc_run"
name = "proc_total"
name = "mem_free"
name = "mem_shared"
name = "mem_buffers"
name = "mem_cached"
name = "swap_free"
name = "bytes_out"
name = "bytes_in"
name = "pkts_in"
name = "pkts_out"
name = "disk_total"
name = "disk_free"
name = "part_max_used"
name = "sys_cpu_queue_len"
name = "mem_pages_sec"
name = "mem_committed_bytes"
name = "phys_disk_bytes_sec"
name = "phys_disk_time"
It all seems to work just fine, although the disk stat's caused a
problem on one of
my hosts. If gmond exits, try turning off some disk metrics.
The final point is that as the extra metrics are binary coded, it should
be deployed
in an all or nothing way per cluster. (Well maybe there can be some
mixing, so
long as the headnode is the APR daemon.
cheers,
Richard
I know these question may start a huge thread, and I am sorry for that
ahead of time. I am essentially trolling here.
What license is ganglia developed under?
- I believe it is multiple licenses.
Does a product that implements the ganglia protocol have to abide by
that license? Should it have to?
- My gut says no to both.
The essences of what I am getting at here is you have an open source
project that is really cool, works well on most platforms. Someone comes
along and develops some code that is leveraged by this open project, but
is not open itself. Is this an "ok thing"? To me it seems legal, but
smells.
If the closed source project looked at the open source code to figure
out the protocol works, that seems ethically wrong, but not illegal. If
the protocol is open, as in an open standard, then it seems fine. I
think in this case, the developers may be skirting these issues by
releasing the binaries for free.
I do not have a significant contribution to the ganglia source, so any
opinions I have. do not reflect that of the project. I am looking to see
what the opinions are of the actual developers.
Ian C
