| To: | Michael Newton <kimbrr@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: pmie rule for instance disappearing |
| From: | Jonathan Knispel <jkwaoz@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 6 May 2008 17:29:39 +0800 |
| Cc: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx, Mark Goodwin <markgw@xxxxxxx>, Martin Hicks <mort@xxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.SGI.4.58.0805021200370.153363238@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20080410185433.GA7489@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.SGI.4.58.0805021029100.153363238@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.SGI.4.58.0805021200370.153363238@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | pcp-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 20070904.708012) |
On Friday 02 May 2008 13:14:13 Michael Newton wrote: > we need a pmie rule to notice when any instance on a metric disappears. > but the problem is that actually if the instance disppears, > *both* cluster.blah *and* cluster.blah @1 become undefined. I'm pretty rusty but that sounds like a bug. A rule that uses @4 and @5 probably shouldn't stop "working" until time 4 * delta after the metric first disappears. [ Down with historical revisionism! ;) ] > while im about it, wouldnt u expect count_inst( cluster.blah >=0 ) > to evaluate zero when there are no instances? and sum_inst ? Seems very reasonable. Having said those things, I do vaguely recall there were some fairly subtle issues dealing with zeroes and undefined values back in the early days. Regards, Jonathan |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | kmchart updates (1.2.2), Nathan Scott |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | pcp updates, nscott |
| Previous by Thread: | pmie rule for instance disappearing, Michael Newton |
| Next by Thread: | Re: missing xcode projects when building kmchart, nscott |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |