pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] Patch: gfs2 PMDA additional metrics for review/inclusion

To: Paul Evans <pevans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] Patch: gfs2 PMDA additional metrics for review/inclusion
From: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 22:47:33 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <519E43ED.8020701@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <517FBD63.3010804@xxxxxxxxxx> <1117296374.7864618.1367373452615.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx> <5180D92F.40809@xxxxxxxxxx> <519E43ED.8020701@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: pblpYYUxonAui8Cbn1HaibrD6VXryg==
Thread-topic: Patch: gfs2 PMDA additional metrics for review/inclusion
Hi Paul!

----- Original Message -----
> Hi Nathan,
> 
> It has taken a bit longer than I originally planned it to but I have

No problem.

> made all of the suggested changes to the code that were pointed out.

Thanks, its looking really good.

> These changes are available at git://github.com/pauljevans/pcp.git gfs2
> 
> I look forward to feedback.

I've pulled in your latest changes, and re-reviewed.  A few things here
and there stood out in the new code - where possible I've fixed things
up that seemed NQR.  A couple of questions/comments remain - see below.

On an unrelated note, I've pushed our changes to the gfs2 branch on oss.
I noticed your last commit message was extensive (which is good!) but it
had no line wrap (less good) - so, I did a git rebase then a "git commit
--amend", and then ran your message through fmt(1).  *NOTE* that this'll
mean a git pull on your end will not work now.  Not a problem - if you
just re-clone or create a new branch based on the new gfs2 branch, all
will be well for your next set of changes/updates.

This is now looking almost ready for merging.  Please look over the few
changes I made (see git commit messages in separate mail) - I hope they
are self-explanatory and make sense, if not please lemme know.

OK, so those last couple of things ...

- I didn't really understand the intention of the on-stack "value" local
  variable in gfs2_store().  Its initially set to zero, never modified,
  but is tested for equality to zero or one later on...?  Is this just a
  leftover from earlier development, or some other intention there?

- The QA tests both fail for me.  The way the testing model works is a
  test driver script (qa/check) runs the test(s) and then compares the
  output they produce to the expected output (i.e. 654.out & 655.out).
  The expected output file for 655 is missing, and 654 doesn't produce
  the output in 654.out anymore.

More information on the testing methodology can be found in qa/README in
the git tree.

Once the above are resolved, it is looking ready for merging to me (which
will see it arrive in pcp-3.8.1 at this stage).

The next steps from there would be:

- A man page for pmdagfs2 would be a good idea, esp. since its a fairly
  complex agent - see man/man1/pmdacisco.1 as an example.  Description of
  the store-to-enable/disable mechanism would be helpful.

- A client tool to drive the extraction and reporting of stats from the
  various cluster nodes, manage the enabling / disabling of tracing, etc.
  As discussed, python might be an appropriate language (other option is
  C), some tests and a man page for the new tool would be a good idea as
  well.  Looking forward to this - should be an interesting bit of code!

cheers.

--
Nathan

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