[openstack-dev] [Nova] Ceilometer vs. Nova internal metrics collector for scheduling
Murray, Paul (HP Cloud Services)
pmurray at hp.com
Fri Jul 19 14:37:10 UTC 2013
If we agree that "something like capabilities" should go through Nova, what do you suggest should be done with the change that sparked this debate: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/35760/
I would be happy to use it or a modified version.
From: Sean Dague [mailto:sean at dague.net]
Sent: 19 July 2013 14:28
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova] Ceilometer vs. Nova internal metrics collector for scheduling
On 07/19/2013 08:30 AM, Andrew Laski wrote:
> On 07/19/13 at 12:08pm, Murray, Paul (HP Cloud Services) wrote:
>> Hi Sean,
>> Do you think the existing static allocators should be migrated to
>> going through ceilometer - or do you see that as different? Ignoring
>> backward compatibility.
> It makes sense to keep some things in Nova, in order to handle the
> graceful degradation needed if Ceilometer couldn't be reached. I see
> the line as something like capabilities should be handled by Nova,
> memory free, vcpus available, etc... and utilization metrics handled
> by Ceilometer.
Yes, that makes sense to me. I'd be happy with that.
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
More information about the OpenStack-dev