Open Stack

Responses inline.

On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Ladislav Smola <lsmola at redhat.com> wrote:

> Ok, I'll try to summarize what will be done in the near future for
> Undercloud monitoring.
>
> 1. There will be Central agent running on the same host(hosts once the
> central agent horizontal scaling is finished) as Ironic
>

Ironic is meant to be run with >1 conductor service. By i-2 milestone we
should be able to do this, and running at least 2 conductors will be
recommended. When will Ceilometer be able to run with multiple agents?

On a side note, it is a bit confusing to call something a "central agent"
if it is meant to be horizontally scaled. The ironic-conductor service has
been designed to scale out in a similar way to nova-conductor; that is,
there may be many of them in an AZ. I'm not sure that there is a need for
Ceilometer's agent to scale in exactly a 1:1 relationship with
ironic-conductor?


> 2. It will have SNMP pollster, SNMP pollster will be able to get list of
> hosts and their IPs from Nova (last time I
>     checked it was in Nova) so it can poll them for stats. Hosts to poll
> can be also defined statically in config file.
>

Assuming all the undercloud images have an SNMP daemon baked in, which they
should, then this is fine. And yes, Nova can give you the IP addresses for
instances provisioned via Ironic.


> 3. It will have IPMI pollster, that will poll Ironic API, getting list of
> hosts and a fixed set of stats (basically everything
>     that we can get :-))
>

No -- I thought we just agreed that Ironic will not expose an API for IPMI
data. You can poll Nova to get a list of instances (that are on bare metal)
and you can poll Ironic to get a list of nodes (either nodes that have an
instance associated, or nodes that are unprovisioned) but this will only
give you basic information about the node (such as the MAC addresses of its
network ports, and whether it is on/off, etc).


> 4. Ironic will also emit messages (basically all events regarding the
> hardware) and send them directly to Ceilometer collector
>

Correct. I've updated the BP:

https://blueprints.launchpad.net/ironic/+spec/add-ceilometer-agent

Let me know if that looks like a good description.

-Devananda



> Does it seems to be correct? I think that is the basic we must have to
> have Undercloud monitored. We can then build on that.
>
> Kind regards,
> Ladislav
>
>

> On 11/20/2013 09:22 AM, Julien Danjou wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Nov 19 2013, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
>>
>>  If there is a fixed set of information (eg, temp, fan speed, etc) that
>>> ceilometer will want,
>>>
>> Sure, we want everything.
>>
>>  let's make a list of that and add a driver interface
>>> within Ironic to abstract the collection of that information from
>>> physical
>>> nodes. Then, each driver will be able to implement it as necessary for
>>> that
>>> vendor. Eg., an iLO driver may poll its nodes differently than a generic
>>> IPMI driver, but the resulting data exported to Ceilometer should have
>>> the
>>> same structure.
>>>
>> I like the idea.
>>
>>  An SNMP agent doesn't fit within the scope of Ironic, as far as I see, so
>>> this would need to be implemented by Ceilometer.
>>>
>> We're working on adding pollster for that indeed.
>>
>>  As far as where the SNMP agent would need to run, it should be on the
>>> same host(s) as ironic-conductor so that it has access to the
>>> management network (the physically-separate network for hardware
>>> management, IPMI, etc). We should keep the number of applications with
>>> direct access to that network to a minimum, however, so a thin agent
>>> that collects and forwards the SNMP data to the central agent would be
>>> preferable, in my opinion.
>>>
>> We can keep things simple by having the agent only doing that polling I
>> think. Building a new agent sounds like it will complicate deployment
>> again.
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131120/0bfe5deb/attachment.html>