On 08/01/2013 07:02 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-08-01 at 10:36 +0200, Julien Danjou wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 01 2013, Sam Morrison wrote:
>>
>>> OK so is it that ceilometer just leaves the message on the queue or
>>> only consumes certain messages?
>>
>> Ceilometer uses its own queue. There might be other processes consuming
>> this notifications, so removing them may be not a good idea.
>>
>> The problem may be that the notification sender create a queue by
>> default even if there's no consumer on that. Maybe that's something we
>> should avoid doing in Oslo (Cc'ing -dev to get advice on that).
> 
> I'm missing the context here, but it sounds like the default
> notifications queue created isn't the one consumed by ceilometer so it
> fills up and we just shouldn't be creating that queue.
> 
> Sounds reasonable to me. Definitely file a bug for it.

Hmm, if notifications are turned on, it should fill up. For billing
purposes we don't want to lose events simply because there is no
consumer. Operations would alert on it and someone would need to put out
the fire.

That's the reason we create the queue up front in the first place.
Ideally, we could only write to the exchange, but we need the queue to
ensure we don't lose any events.

The CM Collector consumes from two queues: it's internal queue and the
Nova queue (if configured). If CM is looking at the wrong nova queue by
default, the bug would be over there.


> 
> Cheers,
> Mark.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Reply via email to