Open Stack

On Nov 22, 2012, at 9:05 AM, Mark McLoughlin <markmc at redhat.com> wrote:

> Sorry, I didn't manage to keep up with this thread as it happened and
> I'm struggling to get a good handle on it now
> 
> Apparently there was some consensus in the thread around making the
> nova.virt.driver interface and its implementations public and having
> ceilometer consume that. I'm not really seeing that consensus reading
> back.
> 
> Honestly, after looking at what parts of Nova code Ceilometer currently
> uses, that approach looks like an awfully big hammer. AFAICT, Ceilometer
> currently does some pretty simple and generic querying of libvirt for
> CPU, disk and NIC information.
> 
> Even if we stick with this approach of having an agent that talks to
> libvirt, is it really such a huge deal to have code in both Nova and
> Ceilometer that does this?
> 
> Put it another way, if you made a standalone generic library for doing
> just this piece, Nova probably wouldn't bother using it since so little
> code is involved.

The purpose of making a library is so that it works with more hypervisors
than just libvirt. Cielometer needs a common way to talk to libvirt, xenapi,
hyper-v, bare-metal, etc. It think cielometer is also going to expand the
number of things it is metering.

Vish