pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: JSON PMDA with indom cache changes

To: David Smith <dsmith@xxxxxxxxxx>, Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: JSON PMDA with indom cache changes
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 22:22:20 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: pcp <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1432466455.9615965.1433146915880.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <555DEF05.7030108@xxxxxxxxxx> <461406362.3814890.1432280874168.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <55677BB7.3060805@xxxxxxxxxx> <1432466455.9615965.1433146915880.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: gB4gStbDHpiU/J4yhdmSQ6OTOAEsVJGGFW7z
Thread-topic: JSON PMDA with indom cache changes
Hi David,

Oops, s/ceph/json/ below of course, musta been late when I sent that.
The issues from my mail below have all been sorted out and are merged
now.  I've left a section in the main man page where it would be good
to document the json schema and the security model - could you take
that item when you've got time (docs can arrive anytime up to release,
next Wed)?

1052 is also still in need of some sorting love too, I haven't got to
that part yet (from my later mail).  Ken, maybe dbpmda should give us
a sort-the-names-pdu-contents option, for QA?  (see attachment to the
earlier mail I sent David on this for sample .bad)

cheers.

----- Original Message -----
> Hi David,
> 
> Looking good - I've pushed this into my repo to start QA'ing it locally.
> Found a handful of things on final review...
> 
> - missing a pmdaceph.1 man page (see src/pmdas/gluster/pmdagluster.1 for
>   an example from another python PMDA);
> - missing an update to pmdacache.3 man page for the new interface
> - Lukas has converted fedora.spec now, so pcp-pmda-ceph is missing there,
>   and the global python[3]-jsonpointer should be moved there;
> - qa/1052 could use $python for (at least) the ceph testing components to
>   ensure good coverage for both python3 and python2 test machines (doing
>   this uses PCP_PYTHON_PROG which aggressively tests with python3 anywhere
>   it possibly can).
> 
> Otherwise, looks good to me - just running a full QA run - will let you
> know if anything unexpected happens in the new tests.
> 
> cheers.
> 
> --
> Nathan
> 

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