On 20/03/17 11:37 AM, Thomas Goirand wrote:
> > I really don't understand why the Telemetry team insists in being > release-independent, out of big tent and such, when the reality is that > all of released Telemetry components are *very tightly* bound to a > specific versions of OpenStack. IMO, it doesn't make sense upstream, or > downstream of Telemetry. i believe the tightly coupled perception between gnocchi+ceilometer is a misconception. ceilometer can be configured to output to various targets that are not gnocchi. based on dev questions in irc, this is a common workflow that people are actively leveraging. aodh and panko are definitely more bound to ceilometer as they don't have any other sources (currently). > > Now, having Gnocchi out of the OpenStack infra is to me a step in the > wrong direction. We should aim at full integration with the rest of > OpenStack, not getting out. > i should re-iterate, this won't change our testing or integration. ceilometer has a gate that ensures compatibility with gnocchi as a target. this will remain and the auto-scaling aodh+ceilometer+gnocchi+heat use case will continue to be validated. not sure how we can quantify/qualify 'full integration' but we remain committed to ensuring gnocchi+ceilometer works. the use case for gnocchi is generic. if you have to store a bunch of timestamp+value data, use gnocchi. the use case definitely fits openstack's requirement, but i believe you can see it isn't just limited to that. i'm glad we have your opinion here, i had previously asked jd about effects on packaging and while i think Red Hat has a plan already, it'd be interesting to get your feedback on how this will affects other distros. cheers, -- gord __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev