| To: | Mark Goodwin <mgoodwin@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [pcp] Containers analysis with PCP |
| From: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 9 Feb 2015 20:05:05 -0500 (EST) |
| Cc: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivered-to: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <54D95796.9050106@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <2100915892.5240937.1422867358164.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <768474811.5242777.1422867576642.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <y0m7fvr3tem.fsf@xxxxxxxx> <54D9447B.203@xxxxxxxxxx> <743115533.1781377.1423528533840.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <54D955EB.4040201@xxxxxxxxxx> <54D95796.9050106@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Thread-index: | FiEQAOeTe9EhTuqdCVJkg1XdOKbr+A== |
| Thread-topic: | Containers analysis with PCP |
----- Original Message ----- > [...] > Also, would it be a bit more user-friendly if the external instance > names were the container name instead of the container-id? Yeah, I thought alot about that but went with the hash in the end because it means we need to do alot less work in the PMDA for each instance refresh. > BTW pminfo -f containers.state.running shows none are running, but I know > for sure that one of them is. Hmm, thats a good clue. Can you send through the container.pid values?, keen to see what pmdaroot discovered there. thanks. -- Nathan |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [pcp] Containers analysis with PCP, Nathan Scott |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Reduce pmdaproc.sh runtime for pmdaInstall, Nathan Scott |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [pcp] Containers analysis with PCP, Mark Goodwin |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [pcp] Containers analysis with PCP, Mark Goodwin |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |