Well, sort of. One example that I have used a lot over the years is CPU stats, so tracking Idle/IO/User/System. I want the metrics collected, but I’m not going to ever generate an alert. Another thing that I’m seeing is a trend to anomaly detection, so in that case we wouldn’t be doing the alerting but just collecting the stats and sending it off for something else to determine if it’s an alert. That make more sense?
Dan On Jan 8, 2014, at 3:48 AM, Robin Sonefors <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2014-01-07 06:44, Daniel Wittenberg wrote: >> Another nifty feature I think would be nice to have is a “performance” >> resource, so one that > > just collects metrics and nothing more. So I know you can do that now by > > just making it show >> ‘OK’ but sometimes I just want it to quietly collect perf data and nothing >> more. I’m guessing >> I’m probably the only weird one who wants something like that though… > > How should that relate to other services and/or hosts? As in, is there a > context where you want the performance available? > > It might be useful to be able to map extra performance checks for a > host/service, and in a UI merge that information with the information > retrieved from the regular host/service check - for example, you want your > RAM to be used, goshdarnit, but you'd still like it to be graphed with the > other services on the host. Do I understand you correctly?
