Erm, @neuman beat me to it.

On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 9:42 AM, Robert Butts <[email protected]>
wrote:

> >can you send a pointer to any documentation/text available regarding
> 'Stats over HTTP' ?
>
> https://docs.trafficserver.apache.org/en/latest/admin-guide/
> plugins/stats_over_http.en.html#admin-plugins-stats-over-http
>
> https://github.com/apache/trafficserver/tree/c7cfa081ccc5c0b
> 875a8ee665cde3399c48abd5c/plugins/stats_over_http
>
> It's essentially the "official" version of "Astats". In a nutshell, Astats
> is a fork of that, and adds the "System" stats key. It's possible to use
> the unmodified `stats_over_http`, while extending it to add the "System"
> stats Traffic Control needs. Which we're looking into doing, rather than
> maintaining a completely separate fork. But, as above, it may be difficult
> to extend either to have the DS Name. Hopefully I'm wrong.
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Robert Butts <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> >I would like to avoid adding additional configurations to a system, in
>> cases where the system can auto-detect the proper configuration.
>>
>> But the system can't, in this case. Detecting a single field as "must be
>> the DS Name" makes single-domain hosts impossible (such as `localhost`).
>> Single-domain names are perfectly valid within an internal network, we
>> shouldn't make that configuration impossible.
>>
>> I agree, minimizing configuration is ideal, but in this case, it isn't
>> possible without making certain things mysteriously impossible; and that's
>> going to be a very confusing bug for someone to track down, if they need it.
>>
>> Moreover, that configuration does exist, whether we try to magically
>> detect it or not. It is a property of the cache. And that's what Traffic
>> Ops is for -- configuration data about the cache should be stored in TO.
>> Not having it there is going to make Operations' job more difficult,
>> because now they can't easily see what type of Stats a cache is serving.
>> For example, what if there's a bug and the Monitor is inferring the wrong
>> type? Now it's a nightmare for Ops and Dev to track down.
>>
>> I support what you want to accomplish, supporting multiple DSes with the
>> same regex; and it's expensive to parse the domain anyway, it's ideal to
>> have the DS name in the stat. But unfortunately, it isn't possible to
>> automatically infer without making certain configurations impossible, and
>> failing to store the Stats type configuration (which exists, whether we
>> store the data or not) in TO is going to lead to pain.
>>
>> >I do think it would be nice to have Traffic Monitor support some sort of
>> canonical stats interface
>>
>> I have mixed feelings. On one hand, it'd be simpler, if there were "One
>> Right Way" with all the things we want/need. But on the other hand, that
>> would make it painful to use Caches with Traffic Control which don't have
>> extensible stats. It'd mean users would have to set up an intermediary
>> service (for every single Cache) to transform the Stats, for Cache
>> applications which aren't sufficiently configurable.
>>
>> Maybe it'd be better make the Monitor able to easily be extended, similar
>> to adding an endpoint in Golang TO, simply by adding a function in a new
>> file, and adding that func to a "Server Cache Type" map? That solution
>> seems fairly easy, and much easier for users to add custom stats than
>> having to write and deploy an intermediary service. It will also be safe,
>> if we make the TO database field non-nullable and default to the current
>> type.
>>
>>
>> Also be aware @orens that raw stats are part of the /publish/CacheStats
>> API in Traffic Monitor. Changing the Stats format will fundamentally change
>> that API endpoint (unless you also write the Monitor code to rebuild the
>> domain, as inserted into the `Result.Astats.Ats` and `ResultStatHistory`
>> objects). I'm not sure if anything currently uses that (Router? Traffic
>> Stats?), but anything that does will break. Just something to be aware of.
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 31, 2017 at 1:35 AM, Oren Shemesh <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks Ryan, Robert and Dave for your responses.
>>>
>>> Dave, can you send a pointer to any documentation/text available
>>> regarding
>>> 'Stats over HTTP' ?
>>>
>>> I believe I can consider the overall response to the change I am
>>> proposing
>>> as positive :-)
>>>
>>> Robert, from my experience I would like to avoid adding additional
>>> configurations to a system, in cases where the system can auto-detect the
>>> proper configuration.
>>> Any configuration added is another chance for someone making a mistake.
>>>
>>> With the proposal I have made, so configuration is needed: TM
>>> auto-detects
>>> the type of astats information (DS name / entire DS domain) based on a
>>> single 'if' statement which queries a single scalar value.
>>> This also means that, assuming my proposed code change is valid, there
>>> can
>>> be no performance issues.
>>>
>>> Also, I do not know what 'Stats over HTTP' is, but I hope it keeps the
>>> job
>>> of classifying Client HTTP transactions to a DS in the cache (ATS in our
>>> case), avoiding the need to re-classify it in TM.
>>>
>>> (Note: In my mind, the fact that TM currently does this job, based on a
>>> *single* hostName regex per DS, makes the entire feature of having
>>> multiple
>>> regexps per DS very limited in use. Which is a shame, based on the effort
>>> invested in the DB model, TO API, and TR code).
>>>
>>> Thanks a lot guys !
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 7:33 PM, Dave Neuman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi Oren,
>>> > Sorry for the slow response, I think what you are proposing sounds
>>> > reasonable, so +1.  I would, however, like to make sure that we aren't
>>> > affecting the performance of TM too much in terms of both CPU usage
>>> (with
>>> > 1000+ caches) and time to poll all caches/aggregate statistics.
>>> >
>>> > Additionally, I don't think we should be adding new functionality to
>>> astats
>>> > at all. The plan is to move towards the Stats Over HTTP plugin in the
>>> > future, so we should focus on making Traffic Monitor do what we need
>>> it to
>>> > do now, and add new functionality to Stats over HTTP if it doesn't
>>> > currently exist.  I do think it would be nice to have Traffic Monitor
>>> > support some sort of canonical stats interface instead of
>>> > astats/stats_over_http, and I am sure there are several other features
>>> > would be nice to have as well, but I don't think we should be muddying
>>> the
>>> > waters with that right now.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 12:24 PM, Robert Butts <
>>> [email protected]>
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > I'd be +1 if we extend Astats/stats_over_http to have the DS name.
>>> > >
>>> > > It's easy to extend the Monitor to get the name from a field, if it's
>>> > > available. And it should be faster than the current method. But,
>>> Astats
>>> > > doesn't currently support it, and in fact, I don't believe ATS has a
>>> good
>>> > > way to associate an identifier (DS name) with a Remap Rule. Can
>>> anyone
>>> > > confirm?
>>> > >
>>> > > That said, if we're extending `stats_over_http`, I'd really like to
>>> see
>>> > it
>>> > > extended to serve CSV (ideally with the DS name in a field, as
>>> above),
>>> > when
>>> > > the request has an `Accept: text/csv` header. Astats only has a
>>> single
>>> > > level of JSON, and they're all numbers. So there's no reason to use
>>> JSON
>>> > > over CSV, and CSV is drastically simpler and faster to parse.
>>> Especially
>>> > if
>>> > > we break each `.` component of the stat into its own CSV field. The
>>> > Monitor
>>> > > is CPU-bound, so there's a good chance we'd see a noticeable
>>> performance
>>> > > improvement, which translates to a tangible poll time improvement.
>>> > >
>>> > > Also @orens if we can't reasonably extend ATS Astats, we can still
>>> > support
>>> > > your use case for your own cache, by having a separate code path in
>>> the
>>> > > Monitor for your "stats", and adding a "stats type" number or enum
>>> to the
>>> > > Server table (or ideally a new table for "cache servers", since it
>>> only
>>> > > applies to caches). So, the Monitor would look at that field
>>> (possibly
>>> > > adding it to `monitoring.json` or `CRConfig.json`), to determine how
>>> to
>>> > > parse a given server's stats.
>>> > >
>>> > > We've discussed a "stat version" field anyway, for different Astats
>>> > > versions. For example, we're looking into combining the System stats
>>> into
>>> > > the Ats key, and we'd also like to be able to experiment with
>>> different
>>> > > formats (CSV, Protobuf, etc). I think it's a good feature for the
>>> CDN in
>>> > > general, to make stat polling more flexible.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > On Wed, Dec 27, 2017 at 12:21 PM, Durfey, Ryan <
>>> [email protected]>
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > > Oren,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > This is a great conversation to have. I can’t speak to the best
>>> > solution,
>>> > > > but allowing our servers to have a single SSL cert that could be
>>> shared
>>> > > > across delivery services would save us a lot of time, money, and
>>> > > > operational resources. From a product perspective this would be
>>> highly
>>> > > > beneficial to the platform especially since all services are
>>> eventually
>>> > > > moving to SSL.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Key Benefits:
>>> > > >
>>> > > >   1.  Instant Service Builds: All new services could use SSL
>>> > immediately,
>>> > > > no 2-3 business day delays in ordering SSL certs.
>>> > > >      *   This gets us a step closer to instant SSL service builds
>>> > without
>>> > > > the need to implement something like “letsencrypt”.
>>> > > >   2.  Operations Load: Reducing the management of a constant flow
>>> of
>>> > > > orders and renewals for SSL certs would save operations resources
>>> and
>>> > > time.
>>> > > >   3.  Cost Reduction: A reduction in SSL certs equates to
>>> reduction in
>>> > > > purchase and renewal costs.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Ryan Durfey    M | 303-524-5099
>>> > > > CDN Support (24x7): 866-405-2993 or [email protected]<mailto
>>> :
>>> > > > [email protected]>
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > From: Oren Shemesh <[email protected]>
>>> > > > Reply-To: "[email protected]" <
>>> > > > [email protected]>
>>> > > > Date: Wednesday, December 27, 2017 at 2:49 AM
>>> > > > To: "[email protected]" <
>>> > > > [email protected]>
>>> > > > Subject: Two different Delivery Services using the same host
>>> regexp: A
>>> > > > suggested Traffic Monitor code change
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Hi TC Dev people,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > We would like to avoid having to issue a specific SSL certificate
>>> for
>>> > > every
>>> > > > DS, as is needed today.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > (Reminder: Every DS needs a separate certificate because The
>>> domains
>>> > used
>>> > > > by the DS are tr.<ds-name>.<cdn-domain> and
>>> > > > <cache-name>.<ds-name>.<cdn-domain>, and wild-card certs support
>>> only
>>> > a
>>> > > > single *, so every cert is issued to *.<ds-name>.<cdn-comain>,
>>> which
>>> > > makes
>>> > > > it DS-specific).
>>> > > >
>>> > > > When configuring two different DSes to use the same host regexp,
>>> and
>>> > > > configuring additional path regexps to differentiate between them,
>>> it
>>> > is
>>> > > > possible to overcome this issue.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > For example: DS 'my-ds1' can have host regexp .*\.my-ds\..* , and
>>> path
>>> > > > regexp /ds1/.* (Both with order 0), and DS 'my-ds2' has the same
>>> host
>>> > > > regexp and path regexp /ds2/.*.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > This makes TR redirect requests of the form
>>> > > > tr.my-ds.<cdn-domain>/ds1/<whatever> to
>>> > > > <cache-name>.my-ds.<cdn-domain>/ds1/<whatever>, do the same for
>>> > > > tr.my-ds.<cdn-domain>/ds2/<whatever>, and respond with '503
>>> service
>>> > > > unavailable' to requests to tr.my-ds.<cdn-domain> which do not
>>> start
>>> > with
>>> > > > /ds1/ or /ds2/.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > So with TR, So far so good.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > ATS can also differentiate between the DSes based on the path, so
>>> there
>>> > > is
>>> > > > no problem there as well.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > However, there is a problem with Traffic Monitor:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Because astats sends per-DS info based on the origin name, TM
>>> requires
>>> > > that
>>> > > > every DS has a unique host regexp (See
>>> > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/blob/
>>> > > > 3e3a5f41d482a065f46ef287b347e66d7d205d82/traffic_monitor/
>>> > > > todata/todata.go#L234
>>> > > > ).
>>> > > > This is so that TM can map origin names from astats back to a DS.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > So, I would like to make a small change to the TM code:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > If the astats info contains only a single host name, assume it is
>>> > already
>>> > > > the DS name.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > (This would be implemented in  <goog_1101383350>
>>> > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-trafficcontrol/blob/
>>> > > > 3e3a5f41d482a065f46ef287b347e66d7d205d82/traffic_monitor/
>>> > > > cache/cache.go#L419
>>> > > > :
>>> > > >
>>> > > > if len(statParts) == 2 { // [0] is DS name, [1] is statName
>>> > > > ds = statParts[0]
>>> > > > }
>>> > > > else {
>>> > > > ... existing code which uses statsParts[0:len(statsParts)-1]
>>> > > > }
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Obviously, the ds should be checked against the list of all DSes to
>>> > make
>>> > > > sure it is valid, I wrote this code line just to demonstrate the
>>> idea).
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Of course, the astats plugin for ATS might not support this today
>>> (I am
>>> > > not
>>> > > > sure), but a different cache (Hint: Qwilt cache) has no problem
>>> > reporting
>>> > > > the astats information per DS name.
>>> > > > If needed, the astats code could be improved to do that, as well.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > I believe that this change, while being very small and unobtrusive,
>>> > would
>>> > > > make the information passed from caches to TM 'cache vendor
>>> agnostic',
>>> > > > while also eliminating the need to re-classify URLs into DS (Which
>>> is
>>> > > what
>>> > > > happens today in TM), hence it is a good step in a good direction.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Any comments / opinions, please ?
>>> > > >
>>> > > > --
>>> > > >
>>> > > > *Oren Shemesh*
>>> > > > Qwilt | Work: +972-72-2221637 <+972%2072-222-1637>| Mobile:
>>> +972-50-2281168 <+972%2050-228-1168> |
>>> > [email protected]
>>> > > > <mailto:[email protected]>
>>> > > > <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *Oren Shemesh*
>>> Qwilt | Work: +972-72-2221637| Mobile: +972-50-2281168 | [email protected]
>>> <[email protected]>
>>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to