If we agree that "something like capabilities" should go through Nova, what do you suggest should be done with the change that sparked this debate: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/35760/
I would be happy to use it or a modified version. Paul. -----Original Message----- From: Sean Dague [mailto:s...@dague.net] Sent: 19 July 2013 14:28 To: OpenStack Development Mailing List Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Ceilometer vs. Nova internal metrics collector for scheduling On 07/19/2013 08:30 AM, Andrew Laski wrote: > On 07/19/13 at 12:08pm, Murray, Paul (HP Cloud Services) wrote: >> Hi Sean, >> >> Do you think the existing static allocators should be migrated to >> going through ceilometer - or do you see that as different? Ignoring >> backward compatibility. > > It makes sense to keep some things in Nova, in order to handle the > graceful degradation needed if Ceilometer couldn't be reached. I see > the line as something like capabilities should be handled by Nova, > memory free, vcpus available, etc... and utilization metrics handled > by Ceilometer. Yes, that makes sense to me. I'd be happy with that. -Sean -- Sean Dague http://dague.net _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev