>So in other words, we could add some addition configuration to the >port directive to specify it as an XML_port (currently supported) or a >delta_port (new type). The other option would be to just add a delta_port >configuration directive and add the functionality. I am assuming that as >gmetad evolves, especially with the python rewrite, that the current >XML_port would become obsolete in favor of the delta_port.
Right. I think there should be less ports used, not more. I had mentioned before that if all sockets accepted a simple command before sending their data, then only that one interactive port would be needed. It would simply return the data requested by the command. If command is blank, then return everything like the current non-interactive ports do. >The next thing to do would be to add the same type of functionality to >gmond so that we aren't sending a lot of unnecessary data there as well. So does this diff idea assume changes since last sent? Then it must assume there is only one process receiving that data? If the data is being sent to multiple locations, then we could miss bits unless we track the different destinations. -twitham ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ Ganglia-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ganglia-developers
