pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: pcp updates: primary pmie, pmlogconf fix

To: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: pcp updates: primary pmie, pmlogconf fix
From: fche@xxxxxxxxxx (Frank Ch. Eigler)
Date: Tue, 31 May 2016 15:12:50 -0400
Cc: pcp developers <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1736934089.50183791.1464338271093.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> (Nathan Scott's message of "Fri, 27 May 2016 04:37:51 -0400 (EDT)")
References: <665590733.50183782.1464338262370.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <1736934089.50183791.1464338271093.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux)
> commit fa0c88b841f6cd7b8da95dcd7cb13e5a11cf889f
> Author: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date:   Fri May 27 18:32:24 2016 +1000
>
>     rc scripts: add primary (local) pmie concept to pmie
>     
>     Similar to the primary pmlogger, this extends the pmie
>     control format to allow creation of a primary localhost
>     pmie process which enabled localhost-specific rules.

>     The stopped-pmda detection rule is added in as the first
>     localhost-specific rule, to improve the reliability of
>     the pmda restart process.

Please elaborate about the effect of these proposed changes upon
routine pmieconf-generated configuration files.  How are non-"primary"
pmie instances protected from having to try send pmsignals across a
network?

Why remove the pure notification-triggering clauses, which -are-
useful across the network?

- FChE

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