Interesting -- I hadn't considered per-process stats. Would a cli command like 'thermos top' be sufficient in this case? I'm just wondering if this is an "always on" need or if a stat-a-la-carte solution would work.
On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Steve Niemitz <st...@tellapart.com> wrote: > While we don't rely on the stats, I do think that they are nice to have. > Mesos doesn't export stats down to the per-process level, so we lose some > resolution there. > > That being said, currently we run about 1/2 our jobs in docker, which > doesn't have per-process stats in the observer right now, so we're already > running without them now anyways. > > What about the runners themselves exporting stats for the processes they're > running, and the observer reading those? > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Zameer Manji <zma...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Would removing this also remove the psutil dependency from the observer? > > > > On Mon, Feb 9, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Brian Wickman <wick...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > Does anybody rely upon the resource monitoring feature in the Thermos > > > observer UI (the UI on port :1338)? Specifically the cpu/ram/disk > > columns. > > > > > > As far as I know, nobody is using Thermos in the absence of Mesos, and > > > because the Mesos slave provides the same information more accurately, > > I'm > > > inclined to remove this feature from the UI. This will simplify the > code > > > quite a bit and also reduce the resources consumed by the observer as > > well > > > (we find it burns 2-4% CPU per box in practice.) > > > > > > ~brian > > > > > > -- > > > Zameer Manji > > > > > > > > >
