Open Stack

Thanks for the response Gordon.  I work together with Tracy and can add a couple of things:

We use ceilometer-compute and we would like to have it push metrics directly to Gnocchi, bypassing the rabbit queues that ceilometer uses in the default Mitaka configuration.  Currently our ceilometer-compute pushes to the notification queue, which gets consumed by a ceilometer process and put into the metrics queue, which in turn gets consumed and pushed to gnocchi by the another ceilometer process.  

We have tried to set the ‘publisher’ in the ceilometer pipeline.yaml file to gnocchi:// instead of notifier://, but it doesn’t seem to do anything.  No errors or anything, it just doesn’t seem to try and send metrics to the configured gnocchi endpoint.  

We are running RDO and have openstack-ceilometer-compute-6.1.3-2.el7.   We’re curious if a different version of openstack-ceilometer-compute is required in order to send metrics directly to gnocchi.

Mike


> On Jun 23, 2017, at 2:07 PM, gordon chung <gord at live.ca> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On 23/06/17 02:50 PM, Tracy Comstock Roesler wrote:
>> We’ve been using gnocchi in mitaka for a few months now but we’ve run
>> into some issues with performance, predominantly because of the number
>> of data points sent along rabbitmq.
> 
> i'm not sure what rabbitmq has to do with gnocchi since gnocchi itself 
> does not utilise rabbitmq? you mean ceilometer? here? which queues are 
> growing in rabbitmq?
> 
>> 
>> We’ve tried to bypass rabbit, but  configuring our pipeline.yaml to push
>> to 'gnocchi://' hasn’t failed.  Do you think we’d have better luck with
>> 'direct://', or is it just not possible?
>> 
> 
> what is your error? gnocchi:// is just an alias for direct:// publisher 
> so it won't change much.
> 
>> I’ve also seen emails about potentially updating/backporting the
>> dispatcher code while using a gnocchi 2.1 installation.  Is this a safe
>> method?  I’m guessing by upgrading the dispatching code, I can resolve
>> the problem of having to publish our stuff to rabbit.
>> 
> 
> is it safe? i'm not sure if backporting newer ceilometer code will work 
> with gnocchiv2.1. that said, i don't recommend you use gnocchiv2.1 as i 
> would say only starting in gnocchiv3 is it actually usable (my personal 
> opinion). if you backport newer dispatcher but use gnocchiv3+ or 
> gnocchiv4, it should work but you should probably understand the code 
> before doing so.
> 
>> 
>> I’m trying to resolve a backlog issue we’re having because we leverage
>> gnocchi and metricd for canary instances as elastic scaling of nodes.
>> 
> 
> backlog in gnocchi? if you mean when you run 'gnocchi status', the 
> values never stop growing, then i would say 1) only gnocchiv3+ is usable 
> 2) add more metricd workers 3) gnocchiv4 is better than gnocchiv3.
> 
> cheers,
> 
> -- 
> gord
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators