pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] fibre adapter counters in pcp?

To: Mark Goodwin <mgoodwin@xxxxxxxxxx>, <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] fibre adapter counters in pcp?
From: Robert verkerk <robert.verkerk@xxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:57:25 +0200
Cc: <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Services <ds-tg@xxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <4F8E094C.5090208@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <4F8D20CD.8020404@xxxxxxx> <4F8E094C.5090208@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.28) Gecko/20120313 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.20
Hi,

We are happy to assist to get these parameters in pcp again.

Granting you access to the systems is problematic. The systems where we have pcp installed are our production systems.

greetings,

Robert Verkerk



On 04/18/2012 02:22 AM, Mark Goodwin wrote:
On 04/17/2012 05:50 PM, Robert verkerk wrote:
Hi,

We are using pcp 3.5.5.-1 on SLESS11 SP1. Are there parameters in pcp with which I can see the transmits and receives on our scsi fibre channels? Or are there
ways to get this info?

There are two ways to monitor FC stats, neither of which is currently
supported in PCP out-of-the-box. (a) each HBA in the system has an
entry below /sys/class/scsi_host and for most HBA vendors, there
are per-channel packet counters such as transmit, receive and various
error counters. These are mostly vendor specific and different vendors
support different counters related to their hardware (especially
the error statistics). Or, (b) collect these stats on the switch/port
side, and import into PCP.

A proprietary PCP PMDA was developed for (b) but AFAIK it was
never released as open-source .. and it only supported Brocade
switches.


We have for instance a node with 4 fibre interfaces. 2 interfaces are used for disk access, 2 interfaces are used for tape access. We want to see how much data
is transported over each interface.

We could create a new PMDA to do (a) without too much trouble,
or we could extend the Linux PMDA to support host side FC stats.
Would you be willing to collaborate on the development work to
get this implemented?

Cheers
-- Mark


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