[pcp] Reserve pmid used by the CTDB PMDA

[David Disseldorp]

Thanks for the feedback Ken and Nathan. Sorry for the late response,
I've been out of the office this week.

On Fri, 09 Sep 2011 07:13:18 +1000
Ken McDonell <kenj at internode.on.net> wrote:

> 109 has already been nabbed for the MSSQL PMDA ... if you could move
> to 110 that would help keep the allocation space compact, but if 155
> has already escaped it will be fine to keep that also.
> 
> Just let us know which works for you and we can make it so.

I'll submit a change to upstream ctdb to use 110.

On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 09:10:34 +1000 (EST)
Nathan Scott <nathans at aconex.com> wrote:

> > http://git.samba.org/?p=ctdb.git;a=commit;h=fe7f69d6fc37661c2f1caa11de4ed3a7940d0a2f
> > 
> > A domain id of 155 was plucked out of the air for no good reason.
> > I'm willing to change it to 109 (next available) if necessary.
> 
> Hi David,
> 
> The PMDA seems to use a fairly odd PMID numbering scheme (every metric
> seems to define a unique cluster and a unique item number) ... it
> seems like that might bite you as you add more metrics - what was the
> rationale there, OOC?

I used the simple PMDA as a base, which has a somewhat confusing pmns
file. That said, I should have looked at one of the many others.

Here's what I plan to push to ctdb...

The following changes since commit
8a86ac72088ad9f64ca83218c704f84c9abe00b6:

  ReadOnly: revokechild_active is a list, not a context. (2011-09-13
  18:47:18 +1000)

are available in the git repository at:
  git://oss.sgi.com/ddiss/ctdb master_pmda_namespace

David Disseldorp (1):
      pmda: Use upstream assigned PCP domain id

 utils/pmda/domain.h |    2 +-
 utils/pmda/pmns     |   72
 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------- 2 files changed, 37
 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)

Cheers, David