----- "Ken McDonell" <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> OK, this looks like getting pretty ugly.
>
> Consider the following 4 outputs from pminfo ...
>
> kenj@bozo:~/src/pcp$ pminfo -n /var/lib/pcp/pmns/root -L -m mmv
> mmv PMID: 70.*.*
>
> kenj@bozo:~/src/pcp$ pminfo -n /var/lib/pcp/pmns/root -m mmv
> mmv PMID: 70.*.*
>
> kenj@bozo:~/src/pcp$ pminfo -L -m mmv
> mmv PMID: 70.*.*
>
> kenj@bozo:~/src/pcp$ pminfo -m mmv
> mmv.test.strings PMID: 70.1.6
> mmv.test.string PMID: 70.1.5
> mmv.test.interval PMID: 70.1.4
> mmv.test.indom PMID: 70.1.3
> mmv.test.discrete PMID: 70.1.2
> mmv.test.counter PMID: 70.1.1
> mmv.debug PMID: 70.0.1
> mmv.reload PMID: 70.0.0
>
> According to my original scope, these are all correct.
>
> Nathan would like the third one to produce the same output as the
> last
> one.
>
> If this was to happen, what is the "correct" output for the first and
> second cases?
>
> I'd like to see some justification, not just votes please.
I think first two are OK as is. I'm wondering also if a pminfo flag
is needed for both cases 3 and 4, so that by default they do the same
thing (case 4), but with the new flag report on dynamic nodes (AIUI,
there's no way currently to tell which remote pmcd nodes are dynamic?)
The justification is the local context should not behave differently
to using host context for no real reason, it'll result in bugs & some
surprises for users (like I got!).
cheers.
--
Nathan
|