On Thu, 2008-05-01 at 09:18 +1000, Mark Goodwin wrote:
> nscott@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > But, my issue was local contexts (not pmcd) - I don't see any way for a
> > pmMetricSpec to specify this third kind of context today, and not sure
> > what the best approach to take to implement that is.
> perhaps a reserved word, e.g. LOCALCONTEXT:
That's a valid hostname though. Ken's suggestion of a single
"@" character sounds good to me - no hostname will have that,
and its unambiguous even with the extended pmproxy syntax.
> Do we also want to try and entertain a chain of proxies, separated by ':'?
> I think you mentioned you have no need for more than one, and our
> need has gone away entirely now.
That concept is still feasible - with multiple "@"s though,
not multiple ":"s.