No updates yet. I'll move forward filing a github issue, hoping to gather more feedback.
Bests,
_______________________________________________
On 03/12/2017 03:38 PM, Yaniv Dary wrote:
Any updates on the usage of collectd with rates?
Yaniv Dary Technical Product Manager Red Hat Israel Ltd. 34 Jerusalem Road Building A, 4th floor Ra'anana, Israel 4350109 Tel : +972 (9) 7692306 8272306 Email: ydary@redhat.com IRC : ydary
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 4:17 PM, Yaniv Dary <ydary@redhat.com> wrote:
Yaniv Dary Technical Product Manager Red Hat Israel Ltd. 34 Jerusalem Road Building A, 4th floor Ra'anana, Israel 4350109 Tel : +972 (9) 7692306 8272306 Email: ydary@redhat.com IRC : ydary
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 4:06 PM, Francesco Romani <fromani@redhat.com> wrote:
On 02/28/2017 12:24 PM, Yaniv Dary wrote:
> We need good answers from them to why they do not support this use case.
> Maybe a github issue on the use case would get more attention. They
> should allow us to choose how to present and collect the data.
> Can you open one?
>
I can, and I will if I get no answer in few more days.
Meantime, among other things, I'm doing my homework to understand why
they do like that.
This is the best source of information I found so far (please check the
whole thread, it's pretty short):
https://mailman.verplant.org/pipermail/collectd/2013-September/005924.html
Quoting part of the email
"""
We only came up with one use case where having the raw counter values is
beneficial: If you want to calculate the average rate over arbitrary
time spans, it's easier to look up the raw counter values for those
points in time and go from there. However, you can also sum up the
individual rates to reach the same result. Finally, when handling
counter resets / overflows within this interval, integrating over /
summing rates is trivial by comparison.
Do you have any other use-case for raw counter values?
Pro:
* Handling of values becomes easier.
* The rate is calculated only once, in contrast to potentially several
times, which might be more efficient (currently each rate conversion
involves a lookup call).
* Together with (1), this removes the need for having the "types.db",
which could be removed then. We were in wild agreement that this
would be a worthwhile goal.
Not for adding units:
Contra:
* Original raw value is lost. It can be reconstructed except for a
(more or less) constant offset, though.
How is this done?"""
Looks like this change was intentional and implemented after some
discussion.
I understand this, but most monitoring system will not know what to do with this value.
Bests,
--
Francesco Romani
Red Hat Engineering Virtualization R & D
IRC: fromani
-- Francesco Romani Red Hat Engineering Virtualization R & D IRC: fromani
Devel mailing list
Devel@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel