[openstack-dev] [Ironic][Ceilometer] get IPMI data for ceilometer
lsmola at redhat.com
Thu Nov 21 08:08:00 UTC 2013
On 11/20/2013 07:14 PM, Devananda van der Veen wrote:
> Responses inline.
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Ladislav Smola <lsmola at redhat.com
> <mailto: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?
Here it is described and tracked:
> 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?
Yeah we have already talked about that. Maybe some renaming will be in
place later. :-) I don't think it has to be 1:1 mapping. There was only
requirement to have "Hardware agent" only on hosts with
ironic-conductor, so it has access to management network, right?
> 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).
Ok sorry I have misunderstood the:
"If there is a fixed set of information (eg, temp, fan speed, etc) that
ceilometer will want,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 thought I've read the data will be exposed, but it will be just
internal Ironic abstraction, that will be polled by Ironic and send
directly do Ceilometer collector. So same as the point 4., right? Yeah I
guess this will be easier to implement.
> 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:
> Let me know if that looks like a good description.
Yeah, seems great. I would maybe remove the word 'Agent', seems Ironic
will send it directly to Ceilometer collector, so Ironic acts as agent,
> 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,
> 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
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev