pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] [PATCH] 389 DS PCP PMDA

To: myllynen@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [pcp] [PATCH] 389 DS PCP PMDA
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 04:28:05 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: Rich Megginson <rmeggins@xxxxxxxxxx>, pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <54227ED0.5080404@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <541C1297.6050009@xxxxxxxxxx> <1651635410.53660103.1411447552098.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <54226A52.7050304@xxxxxxxxxx> <54227ED0.5080404@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: ngVDCp8lvtlUCLQXNETtKHiRhC6mWg==
Thread-topic: 389 DS PCP PMDA
Hi Marko,

----- Original Message -----
> [...]
> actually, I had a quick look at this already. I think it's doing basic
> sanity checking already very well and if 389 DS reports unexpected
> values then there's not much the PMDA could do about it. If 389 DS is
> not responding, the PMDA should be able to cope with that (fails loudly
> if connection setup or bind fails, later on simply does not update
> metrics if searches fail). I think we can also trust Net::LDAP to work
> without issues.

*nod*

> Perhaps we can revisit this later if there are any sorts of issues
> reported with the PMDA.

Yep, sounds good - thanks for the review.

cheers.

--
Nathan

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>