Hi,
If you create some new endpoints, you must have them in pure-REST-form in the first place.
The /query format should follow afterwards, if it's necessary at all.
- Micke
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joel Takvorian" <jtakvori(a)redhat.com>
To: "Discussions around Hawkular development"
<hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org>
Sent: Friday, September 2, 2016 4:16:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Hawkular-dev] Availability metrics: aggregate stats series
Ok so i can use '/aggregate' for the time being, but if someone has a better idea
please tell me.
The input query would be basically same as the existing query request on (POST) /raw/query
: list of ids, start, end, limit, order ; and eventually 'tags' also
Output would be a list of DataPoint<RatioMap<AvailabilityType>>
RatioMap<T> being a map of <T, Double> giving the ratio. Same data structure
can be used for aggregated string metrics.
Eventually the RatioMap object can contain an integer " samples " that gives the
number of aggregated series on that point.
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Jay Shaughnessy < jshaughn(a)redhat.com > wrote:
Joel, I'm not sure I was clear about the legacy use of 'mixed'. MIXED was
actually an availability value, like UP or DOWN, but used for a set of availability values
that contained a mix of UP, DOWN, etc. So, for a group of resources if 7 were UP, 2 were
DOWN and 1 was UNKNOWN, that would have been mixed.
I'm OK with your proposed endpoints but I didn't want you to name it that way
because of history, because that's not how we used 'mixed'. If you preferred
/aggregate, /set, /group or whatever, go ahead and use that instead.
On 9/2/2016 7:58 AM, Joel Takvorian wrote:
Also if I go on, it probably means create new endpoints for mixed availability. For
instance:
/availability/mixed
Can you give an example of what you're thinking for params and returned data?
and in case we're interested in getting stats of a mixed availability, something like:
/availability/mixed/stats
Parallel changes would be done for string data type.
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 11:21 AM, Thomas Heute < theute(a)redhat.com > wrote:
That sounds like a pretty useful feature to me.
Is there any blocker or can Joel move forward ?
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 6:14 PM, Jay Shaughnessy < jshaughn(a)redhat.com > wrote:
Certainly you can't base overall application health on some random aggregate avail.
It's an indicator, like so many other things, of where problems could lie. I don't
think there is anything wrong with a percentage as a quick indicator, from there you'd
drill down as needed. As Joel says, it depends also on what you choose to aggregate. When
your URL response times are degraded, likely firing alerts, you then want to understand
why. Aggregate avails could help answer the questions. There's always examples of how
to misuse tools, a hammer can easily break your thumb, doesn't mean hammers are bad.
On 8/30/2016 11:45 AM, Joel Takvorian wrote:
Just a precision because I'm not sure if I was clear on that: the idea is to mix
series based on a list of ids, or tags. Not *everything*
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 5:39 PM, Joel Takvorian < jtakvori(a)redhat.com > wrote:
I agree that you won't want to mix everything, but you can still adopt some groupings
that are meaningful, for instance group all front-end servers into a front-end
availability series, and all back-ends into another series.
Moreover, once you get all the availability as ratio, it's easy to map to a binary
availability if it's what you're looking for. The REST api will provide the data,
then it's up to you to display what is the most relevant. I think ratio datapoints is
an easy-to-use, yet complete, information.
Joel
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 5:16 PM, Michael Burman < miburman(a)redhat.com > wrote:
Hi,
So if I have 8 MySQLs, 4 primaries, 4 replicas. One primary is down and the replica of
that set is down as well. I request Availability of my datastore and I get 80% UP. If I
had two replicas down instead, I would get 80% UP. There's a huge difference in these
scenarios.
I'm not a fan of percents for that simple reason. Is my service up? Yes, it's 99%
up, only all the front-end servers are down.. ugh.
- Micke
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Sanda" < jsanda(a)redhat.com >
To: "Discussions around Hawkular development" < hawkular-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
Sent: Tuesday, August 30, 2016 4:11:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Hawkular-dev] Availability metrics: aggregate stats series
I like the idea of aggregated availabilities, but I don’t know that it can easily be
simplified to up/down. Let’s say we have 3 Cassandra nodes deployed with
replication_factor = 1. If one node goes down we are at 66% availability.
On Aug 29, 2016, at 3:24 AM, Joel Takvorian < jtakvori(a)redhat.com
> wrote:
Hello all,
I'm still aiming to add some features to the grafana plugin. I've started to
integrate availabilities, but now I'm facing a problem when it comes to show
aggregated availabilities ; for example think about an OpenShift pod that is scaled up to
several instances.
Since availability is basically "up" or "down" (or, to simplify with
the other states such as "unknown", say it's either "up" or
"non-up"), I propose to add this new feature: availability stats with
aggregation. The call would be parameterized with an aggregation method, which would be
either "all of" or "any of": with "all of" we consider that
the aggregated series is UP when all its parts are UP.
It would require a new endpoint since the AvailabilityHandler currently only expose stats
queries with metric id as query parameter - not suitable for multiple metrics.
Any objection or remark for this feature?
Joel
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
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