[openstack-dev] [Ceilometer][QA][Tempest][Infra] Ceilometer tempest testing in gate

Nadya Privalova nprivalova at mirantis.com
Thu Mar 20 11:17:50 UTC 2014

Sean, thank for analysis.
JFYI, I did some initial profiling, it's described here

On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 2:15 PM, Sean Dague <sean at dague.net> wrote:

> On 03/20/2014 05:49 AM, Nadya Privalova wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > First of all, thanks for your suggestions!
> >
> > To summarize the discussions here:
> > 1. We are not going to install Mongo (because "is's wrong" ?)
> We are not going to install Mongo "not from base distribution", because
> we don't do that for things that aren't python. Our assumption is
> dependent services come from the base OS.
> That being said, being an integrated project means you have to be able
> to function, sanely, on an sqla backend, as that will always be part of
> your gate.
> > 2. Idea about spawning several collectors is suspicious (btw there is a
> > patch that run several collectors:
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/79962/ .)
> Correct, given that the collector is already one of the most expensive
> processes in a devstack run.
> > Let's try to get back to original problem. All these solutions were
> > suggested to solve the problem of high load on Ceilometer. AFAIK,
> > Tempest's goal is to test projects` interactions, not performance
> > testing. The perfect tempest's behaviour would be "start ceilometer only
> > for Ceilometer tests". From one hand it will allow not to load db during
> > other tests, from the other hand "projects` interactions" will be tested
> > because during Ceilometer test we create volums, images and instances.
> > But I'm afraid that this scenario is not possible technically.
> > There is one more idea. Make Ceilometer able to monitor not all messages
> > but filtered set of messages. But anyway this is a new feature and
> > cannot be added right now.
> >
> > Tempest guys, if you have any thoughts about first suggestion "start
> > ceilometer only for Ceilometer tests" please share.
> The point of the gate is that it's integrated and testing the
> interaction between projects. Ceilometer can be tested on it's own in
> ceilometer unit tests, or by creating ceilometer functional tests that
> only run on the ceilometer jobs.
> While I agree that Tempest's job is not to test performance, we do have
> to give some basic sanity checking here that the software is running in
> some performance profile that we believe is base usable.
> Based on the latest dstat results, I think that's a dubious assessment.
> The answer on the collector side has to be something other than
> horizontal scaling. Because we're talking about the collector being the
> 3rd highest utilized process on the box right now (we should write a
> dstat plugin to give us cumulative data, just haven't gotten there yet).
> So right now, I think performance analysis for ceilometer on sqla is
> important, really important. Not just horizontal scaling, but actual
> performance profiling.
>         -Sean
> --
> Sean Dague
> Samsung Research America
> sean at dague.net / sean.dague at samsung.com
> http://dague.net
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140320/5c40cfb8/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list