Open Stack

given John's reply, i think we should start a new thread? apologies for 
hijacking log thread.

On 23/11/2015 5:01 AM, Alexis Lee wrote:
> gord chung said on Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 01:32:02PM -0500:
>> On 20/11/15 11:33 AM, Alexis Lee wrote:
>>> why would a producer spit out non-useful datapoints? If no-one cares
>>> or will ever care, it simply shouldn't be included.
>> ... right now the
>> producer is just sending out a grab bag of data that it thinks is
>> important but doesn't define who the audience is. ...
>>
>> ... whoever the producer of notifications is, it should know it's
>> audience.
> Here I, with cdent, have to disagree. The criterion has to be
> "potentially useful to someone", rather than tailoring production to the
> known audience.

so i'm not suggesting producers need to know the entire audience or for 
it to be tailored to a single consumer. i do think whatever we put out 
as a notification should have at least one potential recipient in mind 
(see: useful data to someone [not a hypothetical]). i'm all for 
flexibility and multiple/any consumers, but right now, to be honest, our 
notification criteria seems to be similar to "that guy outside your 
local mall yelling stuff and hoping he makes a convert."

this is just me trying to view it from another approach -- trying to vet 
our current process :)

>
>>> The problem is knowing what each consumer thinks is interesting and that
>>> isn't something that can be handled by the producer.
> ^ this is important.
>
>> the notification consumption service in ceilometer is essentially
>> just a pipeline that normalises select incoming notifications into a
>> data model(s) and pushes that model to whoever wants it (a known
>> consumer is the storage service but it's configurable to allow other
>> consumers).
> It sounds like Ceilometer is performing a mapping function then and has
> to be responsible for knowing how to do that. IE Ceilometer has to
> express an opinion on relevance and presentation. This is inevitably
> going to be a pain in the butt to maintain, but it's Ceilometer's job,
> not the services, since it's Ceilometer trying to express an opinion.
fair enough, i'm just re-raising common feedback i receive when projects 
want to add metrics for ceilometer to collect: 'why do i need to edit 
ceilometer, it's my data.' so there is obviously a divide in the 
community as to whose responsibility it is for maintaining the data.

-- 
gord