Open Stack

So then in the end, there will be 3 monitoring systems to learn, configure, and debug? Monasca for cloud users, zabbix for most of the physical systems, and sensu or monit "to be small"?

Seems very complicated.

If not just monasca, why not the zabbix thats already being deployed?

Thanks,
Kevin

________________________________
From: Przemyslaw Kaminski
Sent: Wednesday, November 26, 2014 2:50:03 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] fuel master monitoring

I agree, this was supposed to be small.

P.

On 11/26/2014 11:03 AM, Stanislaw Bogatkin wrote:
Hi all,
As I understand, we just need to monitoring one node - Fuel master. For slave nodes we already have a solution - zabbix.
So, in that case why we need some complicated stuff like monasca? Let's use something small, like monit or sensu.

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 10:36 PM, Fox, Kevin M <Kevin.Fox at pnnl.gov<mailto:Kevin.Fox at pnnl.gov>> wrote:
One of the selling points of tripleo is to reuse as much as possible from the cloud, to make it easier to deploy. While monasca may be more complicated, if it ends up being a component everyone learns, then its not as bad as needing to learn two different monitoring technologies. You could say the same thing cobbler vs ironic. the whole Ironic stack is much more complicated. But for an openstack admin, its easier since a lot of existing knowlege applies. Just something to consider.

Thanks,
Kevin

________________________________
From: Tomasz Napierala
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2014 6:42:39 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] fuel master monitoring


> On 24 Nov 2014, at 11:09, Sergii Golovatiuk <sgolovatiuk at mirantis.com<mailto:sgolovatiuk at mirantis.com>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> monasca looks overcomplicated for the purposes we need. Also it requires Kafka which is Java based transport protocol.
> I am proposing Sensu. It's architecture is tiny and elegant. Also it uses rabbitmq as transport so we won't need to introduce new protocol.

Do we really need such complicated stuff? Sensu is huge project, and it's footprint is quite large. Monit can alert using scripts, can we use it instead of API?

Regards,
--
Tomasz 'Zen' Napierala
Sr. OpenStack Engineer
tnapierala at mirantis.com<mailto:tnapierala at mirantis.com>







_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev





_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto: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/20141126/a8f4b778/attachment.html>