On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 09:01:24PM +0200, Itamar Heim wrote: > On 12/05/2012 08:57 PM, Adam Litke wrote: > >On Wed, Dec 05, 2012 at 08:30:10PM +0200, Itamar Heim wrote: > >>On 12/05/2012 04:42 PM, Adam Litke wrote: > >>>>I wanted to know what do you think about it and if you have better > >>>>>solution to avoid initiate so many threads? And if splitting vdsm is > >>>>>a good idea here? > >>>>>In first look, my opinion is that it can help and would be nice to > >>>>>have vmStatisticService that runs and writes to separate log the vms > >>>>>status. > >>>Vdsm recently started requiring the MOM package. MOM also performs some > >>>host > >>>and guest statistics collection as part of the policy framework. I think > >>>it > >>>would be a really good idea to consolidate all stats collection into MOM. > >>>Then, > >>>all stats become usable within the policy and by vdsm for its own internal > >>>purposes. Today, MOM has one stats collection thread per VM and one > >>>thread for > >>>the host stats. It has an API for gathering the most recently collected > >>>stats > >>>which vdsm can use. > >>> > >> > >>isn't this what collectd (and its libvirt plugin) or pcp are already doing? > > > >Lot's of things collect statistics, but as of right now, we're using MOM and > >we're not yet using collectd on the host, right? > > > > I think we should have a single stats collection service and clients for it. > I think mom and vdsm should get their stats from that service, > rather than have either beholden to any new stats something needs to > collect.
How would this work for collecting guest statistics? Would we require collectd to be installed in all guests running under oVirt? -- Adam Litke <a...@us.ibm.com> IBM Linux Technology Center _______________________________________________ vdsm-devel mailing list vdsm-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/vdsm-devel
