I like the idea of using hawkular services separate for now, so APM can be a client and
report events remotely. In some scenarios, a co-located environment may be necessary for
performance, but for initial integration work this should be fine.
Regards
Gary
----- Original Message -----
I think you should extend APM to cover scenarios that are useful for
"user
only interested in APM" and facilitate the future integration within
Hawkular services.
By this I mean things like:
- Add APM alert capabilities by using Hawkular Alerting.
Now you may choose to:
a - Add Hawkular Alerting in Hawkular APM package
b - Require a separate install of Hawkular Services if a user wish to use the
alert capabilities (make it optional)
If you do something like this, when/if we decide to make APM a core part of
Hawkular Services, we can certainly collapse the 2 relatively easily, but I
wouldn't go for option 1 right away.
Does that make sense ?
Thomas
On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 5:59 PM, Jay Shaughnessy < jshaughn(a)redhat.com >
wrote:
If the plan is to eventually integrate APM into Hawkular Services (not as an
option) then I'd go with option 1 and then eventually the profile would go
away. I think an add-on UI war would maybe be an optional 'Lab' offering,
there is no UI with which to integrate. The standalone APM offering could
still be offered. I'm not sure whether that would still be offered as a
top-level menu item on
hawkular.org , or also as a 'Lab'.
On 7/25/2016 4:57 AM, Gary Brown wrote:
Hi
Hawkular APM is currently built as a separate distribution independent from
other Hawkular components. However in the near future we will want to
explore integration with other components, such as Alerts, Metrics and
Inventory.
Therefore I wanted to explore the options we have for building an integrated
environment, to provide the basis for such integration work, without
impacting the more immediate plans for Hawkular Services.
The two possible approaches are:
1) Provide a maven profile as part of the Hawkular Services build, that will
include the APM server. The UI could be deployed separately as a war, or
possibly integrated into the UI build?
2) As suggested by Juca, the APM distribution could be built upon the
hawkular-services distribution.
There are pros/cons with both approaches:
My preference is option (1) as it moves us closer to a fully integrated
hawkular-services solution, but relies on a separate build using the profile
(not sure if that would result in a separate release distribution).
Option 2 would provide the full distribution as a release, but the downside
is the size of the distribution (and its dependencies, such as cassandra),
when user only interested in APM. Unclear whether a standalone APM
distribution will still be required in the future - at present the website
is structured to support this.
Thoughts?
Regards
Gary
_______________________________________________
hawkular-dev mailing list hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
_______________________________________________
hawkular-dev mailing list
hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev
_______________________________________________
hawkular-dev mailing list
hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hawkular-dev