One of the outcomes from Juno will be horizontal scalability in the
central agent and alarm evaluator via partitioning[1]. The compute
agent will get the same capability if you choose to use it, but it
doesn't make quite as much sense.
I haven't investigated the alarm evaluator side closely yet, but one
concern I have with the central agent partitioning is that, as far
as I can tell, it will result in stored samples that give no
indication of which (of potentially very many) central-agent it came
from.
This strikes me as a debugging nightmare when something goes wrong
with the content of a sample that makes it all the way to storage.
We need some way, via the artifact itself, to narrow the scope of
our investigation.
a) Am I right that no indicator is there?
b) Assuming there should be one:
* Where should it go? Presumably it needs to be an attribute of
each sample because as agents leave and join the group, where
samples are published from can change.
* How should it be named? The never-ending problem.
Thoughts?
[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113549/
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/115237/
--
Chris Dent tw:@anticdent freenode:cdent
https://tank.peermore.com/tanks/cdent
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
