Hello Lars, This is great, we have been using our own checks previously but having a great and cleaned up option upstream is gold worth.
This was we can all collaborate on having this as a standard toolbox for health checks. Looking forward to see moving forward and would love to contribute, and in the future roll this out across our companies. Best regards On 11/03/2016 07:06 PM, Lars Kellogg-Stedman wrote: > I've recently started working with the oscheck scripts in the > osops-tools-monitoring project [1], and I found that in their current > form they didn't quite meet my needs. In particular: > > - They don't share a common set of authentication options > - They can't read credentials from files > - Many of them require a priori configuration of the openstack > environment, which means they can't be used to health check a new > deployment > > I've spent a little time recently prototyping a new set of health > check scripts, available here: > > https://github.com/larsks/oschecks > > I'd like to emphasize that these *are not* currently meant as a usable > replacement for the existing checks; they were to prototype (a) the > way I'd like the user interface to work and (b) the way I'd like > things like credentials to work. > > This project offers the following features: > > - They use os_client_config for managing credentials, so they can be > configured from a clouds.yaml file, or the environment, or the > command line, and it all Just Works. > > - Authentication is handled in just one place in the code for all the > checks. > > - The checks are extensible (using the cliff framework), which means > that checks with different sets of requirements can be > packaged/installed separately. See, for example: > > https://github.com/larsks/oschecks_systemd > > - For every supported service there is a simple "can I make an > authenticated request to the API successfully" check that does not > require any pre-existing resources to be created. > > - They are (hopefully) structured such that it is relatively easy to > write new checks the follow the same syntax and behavior of the > other checks. > > If people think this is a useful way of implementing these health > checks, I would be happy to do the work necessary to make them a mostly > drop-in replacement for the existing checks (adding checks that are > currently missing, and adding appropriate console-script entrypoints to > match the existing names, etc). > > I would appreciate any feedback. Sorry for the long message, and thanks > for taking the time to read this far! > > [1]: > https://github.com/openstack/osops-tools-monitoring/tree/master/monitoring-for-openstack/oschecks > _______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
