On 01/22/2015 07:48 PM, John Sanda wrote:

On Feb 16, 2015, at 3:48 PM, John Mazzitelli <mazz@redhat.com> wrote:

I will add the following to the discussion:

If past history with customers of JON/users of RHQ/salespeople is any indication, we will get requests to support collecting availability every second (if not every sub-second) even AFTER telling people, documenting, and shouting from the mountaintop that we are not a realtime profiler. So, do we have the throughput/infrastructure that can support one "UP" datapoint coming in every minute for N resources. Do we want to support this?

It seems like this should be a question of scale. Do we provide the scalability both in terms of storage and in terms of processing data to deal with those scenarios? Our strategy around scalability is a topic in its own right, but I do think it is relevant to some of the questions being raised in this thread.

It should be reasonable ;)
IMHO typically one would be happy with a check every 20s/30s or even a minute if the cost is "low", ie: the cost of the monitoring infrastructure is a small fraction of the infrastructure itself.

We need to scale horizontally for processing data and storage (adding Cassandra nodes ?), reaching 1s support won't come without additional infrastructure cost. For sub-second support, I would question the need to store that information, I don't think we should look into this now.

Thomas