Open Stack

Hi Divakar,

The ceilometer has compute agent which runs on every nova-compute node to pick metering data from the VM instances on that node, as well as the central agent which runs alone to pick metering data from other data sources. Both of them support the agent plugins so we can add new plugins to either of them to poll for new metering data.

I'm not sure there is an easy way to integration ceilometer/healthnmon in the database level, because according to my understanding, they're quite different. Ceilometer is focused on the metering data itself and easy to adapt to new metering data type, while healthnmon is more focused on the relationship between the various metering data, as I mentioned at http://wiki.openstack.org/Ceilometer/CeilometerAndHealthnmon#Comparison_and_ways_to_Unify. 

Any other thoughts or comment from ceilometer guys?

Best Regards,
Lianhao

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nandavar, Divakar Padiyar (STSD) [mailto:divakar.padiyar-nandavar at hp.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2013 2:07 AM
> To: Lu, Lianhao; G, Barath Ram
> Cc: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: RE: [ceilometer][healthnmon] ceilometer/healthnmon integration plan discussion
> 
> Hi Lianhao Lu,
> My initial thoughts on the integration was to use Healthnmon like a Driver which would facilitate providing the Inventory as well as
> metering data required by Ceilometer.  Initial integration could be at the database level if required and later we can enable the API
> integration.   This way we can have compute pollster pick the data from Healthnmon instead of picking the data from multiple nodes.
> It would be good to come up with the use case and the solution that works with Ceilometer and Healthnmon together.
> 
> Use cases around healthnmon has been discussed as part of the blueprints submitted to OpenStack and has been summarized in the
> following presentation: https://github.com/downloads/healthnmon/healthnmon/Healthnmon%20OpenStack%20Blueprints.pptx
> 
> Based on this we can discuss on the integration plans further.
> 
> Thanks,
> Divakar
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Lu, Lianhao [mailto:lianhao.lu at intel.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 8:32 AM
> To: G, Barath Ram; Nandavar, Divakar Padiyar (STSD)
> Cc: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> Subject: [ceilometer][healthnmon] ceilometer/healthnmon integration plan discussion
> 
> Hi Barath and Divakar,
> 
> Below is the integration plan we proposed(also available on
> http://wiki.openstack.org/Ceilometer/CeilometerAndHealthnmon#Integration_plan). We'd like to hear your comment.
> 
> 1. Implement the missing meters in Ceilometer
> 1.1 List the detailed information items where we should get from libvirt in Ceilometer for Healthnmon.
> 1.2 Decide what kind of meters are missing in Ceilometer in order to group the information items from 1.2.
> 1.3 Implement the missing meters.
> 
> 2. Integrate Healthnmon through multi-publisher
> 2.1 Healthnmon need to define/implement the communication interface(through notification or restful API?) to allow Ceilometer publishing
> its data.
> 2.2 Implement the publisher/transformers in Ceilometer to publish the meters from step 1 to Healthnmon.
> 
> One big difference between Celilometer and Healthnmon I observed is that how to organize data they collect. For example, for a nova
> instance, Ceilometer collect the information about number of VCPUs and the disk size in 2 different meters, while Healthnmon put them
> together into one data structure. I'm wondering is it acceptable for Healthnmon to accept the 2 different meters from Ceilometer and
> group them together based on the same resource_id information in the 2 meters.
> 
> Best Regards,
> -Lianhao Lu
> 
>