Hi, Nathan -
> > The current code does a log-merge of all previous archives into one,
> > doing data-aging at the same time, so thar particular type of trash
> > doesn't pile up.
>
> /me re-reads the code ... I'm not following what you mean by "doing
> data-aging"?
I was referring to using the "-S NNN" parameter for the pmlogextract
merging, ie., simply dropping data beyond a certain age.
> There is a pmlogreduce(1) tool - but its not used by pmmgr AFAICS.
Yes, I'd like to use that sort of gradual downsampling/aging at some
point as an optional alternative to simply dropping old data.
> Anyway, some people will not want to data reduce and will want to keep
> their original high precision data [...] (I'm assuming a
> single archive for high precision data over months/years is not really
> feasible with the current archive format - but maybe thats something
> we could tackle instead).
I'd love to tackle that instead, definitely, if it doesn't Just Work
already. At some point, when we have a log-archive server, it will be
desirable to have as few input archive files to monitor as possible.
> [...] If we're attempting log merging to the level I later realised
> you may be doing (one archive to rule them all), [pmlogrewrite]
> quickly becomes a pressing need as merging is impossible without it
> (when PMDA evolution occurs, as described in pmlogrewrite(1) para
> #2).
Got it.
- FChE
|