pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [pcp] NFS Server pmda

To: Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx>, Paul Evans <pevans@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [pcp] NFS Server pmda
From: Marko Myllynen <myllynen@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2015 11:54:15 +0200
Cc: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <2104856114.7133363.1423042991272.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: Red Hat
References: <54CFAF63.1000200@xxxxxxxxxx> <2063280794.5937221.1422915037777.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx> <54D0E5A5.6040000@xxxxxxxxxx> <54D1CD57.80908@xxxxxxxxxx> <2104856114.7133363.1423042991272.JavaMail.zimbra@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: myllynen@xxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
Hi,

On 2015-02-04 11:43, Nathan Scott wrote:
>> On 2015-02-03 17:13, Paul Evans wrote:
>>> On 02/02/15 22:10, Nathan Scott wrote:
>>>> At first glance there would appear to be overlap with metrics from the
>>>> Linux kernel PMDA - see the nfs.*, nfs3.*, nfs4.* and rpc.* metrics -
>>>> are there some additional metrics added here that don't exist there?
>>> Err, look like I missed that the nfs.*.reqs metrics had the different
>>> request types as instances. Pretty much everything that was to be
>>> added with nfsserver pmdas is already covered by the existing linux
>>> kernel pmda.
>>
>> yes, you're not the first one missing the fact, perhaps we should add a
>> quick note somewhere about this?
> 
> *nod* - any ideas where it might go, that would be seen by someone going
> down this path?  Maybe the issue is the existing metrics names not being
> expressive enough?

I think a big fat note in a README (e.g. under nfsclient PMDA dir) would
probably have caught my attention.

Thanks,

-- 
Marko Myllynen

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