Re: [pcp] Containers analysis with PCP

[Mark Goodwin <mgoodwin@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 02/10/2015 11:05 AM, Nathan Scott wrote:
> ----- 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.
well the id<->name is 1:1 isn't it? So shouldn't be a lot of extra work??
And you could have a containers.id metric whose indom is the name and value
is the id (to export the mapping). An ascii string name is a lot easier to
use (and remember) than a whopping 64 character hash id :)

> > 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.
containers.pid should pid is 0 for all containers.

I'll fire up gdb and see where the ENOSUP is coming from (might
not be until later today ...)

Cheers