I think the point is where this concept belongs (MiQ or the provider, or somewhere in the
middle).
I see valid that a provider have events that are forwarded to MiQ.
As it is commented, these events can go from different degree of complexities (from quite
simple, or even more complicated, with rules to generate this).
How to configure/manage this on the provider is the key, as Gary comments, possible
options could be REST only, or even UI.
My point is that we are introducing a new concept in MiQ which is the application point of
view, so, perhaps the whole Policy mechanism of MiQ is not enough to offer the richness
that an application point of view from middleware perspective needs, so having the way to
define these events in the provider is ok.
Lucas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gary Brown" <gbrown(a)redhat.com>
To: "Discussions around Hawkular development"
<hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2016 10:02:17 AM
Subject: Re: [Hawkular-dev] "Matter" support in Hawkular
Although having "out of the box" canned triggers defined, it may also still
be good to provide users with a customisation mechanism to define their own
alert triggers - which create "events" for MiQ to consume and react to.
Users could just use the REST APIs - but still may be more user friendly to
offer some form of UI. This shouldn't be an issue, if it is considered
configuration/customisation of the provider?
Regards
Gary
----- Original Message -----
> Hi,
>
> [ I picked "Matter" on purpose in the subject, as the other term (E.) is
> too much overloaded. ]
>
> ManageIQ has Events (going forward I call them ME), that are similar to
> our Alerts.
> There are some event parsers that take incoming data and then forward it
> into the
> MiQ events system, where automatic actions can be triggered
>
> Now we have a pretty similar concept with our alerts.
>
> For ME on metrics, MiQ pulls the metrics and the provider integration
> creates
> the ME on them.
>
> I wonder if for other purposes we can use our existing alerts subsystem
> with some "canned alerts", that translate input into such MiQ-Events and
> forward them into MiQ.
> With "canned" I mean that those are not set up via UI, but rather we
> have "trigger templates" that are applied each time a new resource of a
> given type is added to inventory.
> This implies that those templates can only work on things that do not
> have
> a variable threshold like system going up/down, WildFly reporting
> "reload
> needed" and so on.
>
> While it would be certainly possible to implement this at the level of
> emitting
> inventory "matters" and metric "matters" and so on I think
having that
> central
> piece of logic to do it - could be better to handle.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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