Open Stack

Interesting thread!

I was very intrigued about reading this thread, and reading through 
Julien's blog posts.
We are consuming the various Telemetry projects and I would like to get 
more involved in the Telemetry-effort.

The mentioned Train roadmap ethernetpad [1] is a great start on defining 
the focus for the Telemetry projects.

I think this is a great start to getting to the roots of how, based on 
the words of Julien's, how Ceilometer should
have been build and not how it was built to work around all the 
limitations of the old OpenStack era.

Most new deployments are probably already using Gnocchi, I'm including 
myself, were even third parties has
implemented billing connections to the API. In my opinion the bigger 
questions here is how the various Telemetry
parts should evolve based on the theory that storage is already provided.

There should be a lot of thought put into the difference between a 
metrics- and billingbased storage solution
in the back.

I'll check out the Doodle and see if I can make the next meeting.

Best regards
Tobias

[1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/telemetry-train-roadmap

On 05/08/2019 11:27 PM, Joseph Davis wrote:
> On 5/8/19 7:12 AM, openstack-discuss-request at lists.openstack.org wrote:
>> Hello Trinh,
>> Where does the meeting happen? Will it be via IRC Telemetry channel? Or, in
>> the Etherpad (https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/telemetry-meeting-agenda)? I
>> would like to discuss and understand a bit better the context behind
>> the Telemetry
>> events deprecation.
>
> Unfortunately, I have a conflict at that time and will not be able to 
> attend.
>
> I do have a little bit of context on the Events deprecation to share.
>
> First, you will note the commit message from the commit [0] when 
> Events were deprecated:
>
> "
>
> Deprecate event subsystem
>
> This subsystem has never been finished and is not maintained.
> Deprecate it for future removal.
>
> "
>
> I got the impression from jd at the time that there were a number of 
> features in Telemetry,
>
> including Panko, that were not really "finished" and that the 
> engineers who had worked on them
>
> had moved on to other things, so the features had become unsupported.  
> In late 2018 there was
>
> an effort to clean up things that were not well maintained or didn't 
> fit the direction of Telemetry.
>
> See also: 
> https://julien.danjou.info/lessons-from-openstack-telemetry-deflation/
>
>
> Events is one feature that often gets requested, but the use cases and 
> demand for it are not expressed
>
> strongly or well understood by most people.  If the Telemetry project 
> has demand to de-deprecate
>
> Event handling (including Panko), I'd suggest a review of the 
> requirements for event handling and
>
> possibly choosing a champion for maintaining the Panko service.
>
>
> Also note: over in Monasca we have a spec [1] for handling Events 
> ingestion which I hope we will be
>
> completing in Train.  Contributions and comments welcome. :)
>
>
> joseph
>
> [0] 
> https://github.com/openstack/ceilometer/commit/8a0245a5b3e1357d35ad6653be37ca01176577e4
>
> [1] 
> https://github.com/openstack/monasca-specs/blob/master/specs/stein/approved/monasca-events-listener.rst
>
>
>> On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 12:19 AM Trinh Nguyen<dangtrinhnt at gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi team,
>>>
>>> As planned, we will have a team meeting at 02:00 UTC, May 9th on
>>> #openstack-telemetry to discuss what we gonna do for the next milestone
>>> (Train-1) and continue what we left off from the last meeting.
>>>
>>> I put here [1] the agenda thinking that it should be fine for an hour
>>> meeting. If you have anything to talk about, please put it there too.
>>>
>>> [1]https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/telemetry-meeting-agenda
>>>
>>>
>>> Bests,
>>>
>>> --
>>> *Trinh Nguyen*
>>> *www.edlab.xyz<https://www.edlab.xyz>*
>>>
>>>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/attachments/20190510/5fc95865/attachment-0001.html>