On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 7:22 AM, Gordon Chung <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Meter Names:
> > fanspeed, fanspeed.min, fanspeed.max, fanspeed.status
> > voltage, voltage.min, voltage.max, voltage.status
> > temperature, temperature.min, temperature.max, temperature.status
> >
> > 'FAN 1': {
> > 'current_value': '4652',
> > 'min_value': '4200',
> > 'max_value': '4693',
> > 'status': 'ok'
> > }
> > 'FAN 2': {
> > 'current_value': '4322',
> > 'min_value': '4210',
> > 'max_value': '4593',
> > 'status': 'ok'
> > },
> > 'voltage': {
> > 'Vcore': {
> > 'current_value': '0.81',
> > 'min_value': '0.80',
> > 'max_value': '0.85',
> > 'status': 'ok'
> > },
> > '3.3VCC': {
> > 'current_value': '3.36',
> > 'min_value': '3.20',
> > 'max_value': '3.56',
> > 'status': 'ok'
> > },
> > ...
> > }
> > }
>
>
> are FAN 1, FAN 2, Vcore, etc... variable names or values that would
> consistently show up? if the former, would it make sense to have the meters
> be similar to fanspeed:<trait> where trait is FAN1, FAN2, etc...? if the
> meter is just fanspeed, what would the volume be? FAN 1's current_value?
>
Different hardware will expose different number of each of these things. In
Haomeng's first proposal, all hardware would expose a "fanspeed" and a
"voltage" category, but with a variable number of meters in each category.
In the second proposal, it looks like there are no categories and hardware
exposes a variable number of meters whose names adhere to some consistent
structure (eg, "FAN ?" and "V???").
It looks to me like the question is whether or not to use categories to
group similar meters.
-Devananda
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
