[openstack-dev] Announcing Ekko -- Scalable block-based backup for OpenStack
jaypipes at gmail.com
Wed Jan 27 15:51:06 UTC 2016
On 01/27/2016 12:53 PM, gordon chung wrote:
>> It makes for a crappy user experience. Crappier than the crappy user
>> experience that OpenStack API users already have because we have done a
>> crappy job shepherding projects in order to make sure there isn't
>> overlap between their APIs (yes, Ceilometer and Monasca, I'm looking
>> directly at you).
> ... yes, Ceilometer can easily handle your events and meters and store
> them in either Elasticsearch or Gnocchi for visualisations. you just
> need to create a new definition in our mapping files. you will
> definitely want to coordinate the naming of your messages. ie.
> event_type == backup.<ekko_scope> and event_type == backup.<freezer_scope>.
This isn't at all what I was referring to, actually. I was referring to
my belief that we (the API WG, the TC, whatever...) have failed to
properly prevent almost complete and total overlap of the Ceilometer 
and Monasca  REST APIs.
They are virtually identical in purpose, but in frustrating
slightly-inconsistent ways. and this means that users of the "OpenStack
APIs" have absolutely no idea what the "OpenStack Telemetry API" really is.
Both APIs have /alarms as a top-level resource endpoint. One of them
refers to the alarm notification with /alarms, while the other refers to
the alarm definition with /alarms.
One API has /meters as a top-level resource endpoint. The other uses
/metrics to mean the exact same thing.
One API has /samples as a top-level resource endpoint. The other uses
/metrics/measurements to mean the exact same thing.
One API returns a list JSON object for list results. The other returns a
dict JSON object with a "links" key and an "elements" key.
And the list goes on... all producing a horrible non-unified,
overly-complicated and redundant experience for our API users.
More information about the OpenStack-dev