Re: [Ganglia-developers] Correct counting of CPUs, Cores, Siblings (bz #84)
--- Carlo Marcelo Arenas Belon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 08:05:02AM -0800, Martin Knoblauch wrote: Hi Folks, in order to fix bz#84 for Linux. http://bugzilla.ganglia.info/cgi-bin/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84 I think that the fix for this bug should actually include adding 2 more metrics, as the problem as stated isn't really that ganglia isn't reporting the right count of CPUs, but that there is no way to know if it is virtual or real CPUs for inventory and in some sort also scheduling reasons. This way cpu_num could be kept as the number of available CPUs, as is implicitly described to do in the current documentation for this metric and will have cpu_cores and cpu_sockets as the number of available cores or available sockets. of course for HPC, the number of effective CPUs is a function of all those 3 and the type of code that is being run, so we should leave up to the end users to figure that out while giving them all the information they need for that. the advantages of doing it this way, are that the code is greatly simplified, all possible use cases are covered and the metric is kept backward compatible. comments, anyone? Carlo Carlo, modulo the naming of the new metrics, I completely agree with you. In order to make an educated guess, we need all three components. And we should not forget that more and more clusters in use are running non-HPC workloads, where the virtual CPUs may actually be of use. One thing we should at least keep in mind is the fact the number of CPUs may no longer be a constant - CPU hotplugging is available on Linux and some of the proprietary Unixes. Same for memeory. And the cpu-frequency has been variable for years. Cheers Martin -- Martin Knoblauch email: k n o b i AT knobisoft DOT de www: http://www.knobisoft.de
[Ganglia-developers] maintenance branch for ganglia 2.5.x?
Greetings, There seem to be some platforms (Debian (*) and SuSE being the ones that are more relevant IMHO) that are maintaining their own forks of ganglia based on 2.5.7, while some others (Gentoo, Fedora, NetBSD, FreeBSD and Solaris being the ones that are more relevant IMHO) that are currently providing 3.x based packages but might have still some older versions that are still under support and that were 2.5.x based either directly or through derivatives. In any case, and regardless of the reasons why they decided not to go with the 3.x line (which we should fix also in the short run) we could probably benefit by having a maintenance branch for 2.5.7.x, 2.5.x or 2.x (whatever you guys prefer) where all the work that is being done can be centralized for everyone else benefit. any objections with creating a branch (I would go with monitor-core-2.5.x if there are no better suggestions) where that could be done? Carlo (*) Including derivatives like Ubuntu and its 5 year support for Dapper
Re: [Ganglia-developers] [Ganglia-general] Ganglia+OpenBSD?
On Wed, Dec 27, 2006 at 09:45:35AM -0800, Martin Knoblauch wrote: I used NetBSD as a base from my port (as it is the closest), sadly they are not that similar as to just work with the other source as you can see by the diff. Understand. Btw. you should check the use of the strings NetBSD / FreeBSD in you patch :-) not sure what you mean, but since NetBSD was based on FreeBSD and my port was based in NetBSD I am not surprised at all if there are extra references in between them from the old code, and based on the license (BSD) removing some of them might not be possible. if I recall correctly, the same happens between Cygwin and Linux, and most other platforms that were based on the Linux metrics code (probably including FreeBSD). If you meant to say that there is a lot of duplicated code in between all of them I agree, but having an independent (per platform) metrics.c file where there is no need to use portable code has also its own advantages as it simplifies the maintenance of that platform without concerns of interdependency with other platforms even if it requires that the same bug be fixed several times in some cases (which is why as part of porting OpenBSD I ended up fixing and testing NetBSD and FreeBSD). DragonflyBSD will be most likely closer to FreeBSD and the same for MacOS X (AKA Darwin), but I have no interest on adding those yet (DragonFlyBSD could be an interesting option for clusters, but I'd heard of no one using it in a cluster yet). You realize that we already have a Darwin port, although I do not know the quality/completeness of the metrics code. I do, and I really meant to say (except that my idea got somehow compressed): I have no interest on adding DragonflyBSD or testing Darwin as I have no use for those yet BTW on my private development tree I made a port to Debian/kFreeBSD (uses Linux) and NexentaOS (uses Solaris) just for fun, and too do some torture testing to the autoconf rules used in libmetrics and explore the impact that different kernel/userspace do to it. Carlo
Re: [Ganglia-developers] Gagnlia 3.0.4 released
On Monday 25 December 2006 05:32, Martin Knoblauch wrote: Ho ho ho, Santa just released version 3.0.4 of Ganglia. This is mainly a bugfix release. See the ChangeLog in the tarball for a complete list of changes. Updated Fedora Extras builds for rawhide, FC6 and FC5 coming shortly... -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgp1vtOGfoCA4.pgp Description: PGP signature
