[Hawkular-dev] Monitoring Systems Article

[Thomas Heute]

+1

On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 4:27 PM, John Mazzitelli <mazz at redhat.com> wrote:

> I think we all agree that having an inventory with relationships between
> components and their dependencies/dependents would be very helpful to
> perform more intelligent alerting (e.g. if a database's write performance
> is performing poorly, yes we can alert on the database resource, but any
> application that uses that database for storage should go "yellow" to alert
> the user that performance degradation is caused by the bad DB and that
> storage failures could be on the horizon. Expand this further - you could
> be monitoring a disk, see it is malfunctioning, and alert on all DBs using
> that disk, which in turn can alert on all apps using that DB).
>
> Hawkular Inventory can already store those relationships in a graph, IF
> those relationships are known. BUT! As i see it, it is the discovery of
> those relationships that is the issue.
>
> Sure you can possibly auto-discover SOME relationships (e.g. we could look
> at the <datasource> definitions in WildFly configuration and relate those
> databases to that WildFly application server), but many relationships are
> difficult if not impossible to auto-detect. For example, how does the
> WildFly agent know WHICH database resource to relate to its app server? How
> does the DB resource in inventory (presumably created by another feed) get
> known to the WF agent such that THAT DB gets related with THAT WF Server?).
> In other words, feeds/agents won't know about the full inventory "universe"
> to be able to create many relationships that you would think should be
> obvious to them.
>
> We have Gary's BTM which could be the answer to some of this (his injected
> monitoring code could be used to detect these relationships and
> automatically tell inventory about them - but again, how does it know about
> the full inventory identities of the resources it encounters to be able to
> relate them together).
>
> I think we need a really good UI story to help users map these
> relationships manually. The users will be able to tell us about these
> "hidden" relationships - relationships that cannot be auto-discovered. But
> it needs to be intuitive and easy to map out these relationships.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > Yes interesting, this is why I think the inventory is being an important
> > element of monitoring. It's not enough to look at a single resource, we
> need
> > to look at how multiple resources are "connected".
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 4:15 PM, mike thompson < mithomps at redhat.com >
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > I thought this was an interesting article, especially around syntactic
> > monitoring systems:
> >
> >
> http://container-solutions.com/monitoring-performance-microservice-architectures/
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > hawkular-dev mailing list
> > hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > hawkular-dev mailing list
> > hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
> >
> _______________________________________________
> hawkular-dev mailing list
> hawkular-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/hawkular-dev/attachments/20151211/1a33a08a/attachment.html