Hi, Frank,
On Mon 17 of Jun 2013 10:00:04 Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
Hi, Radek -
> [...]
> 1) "PCP metrics can come and go" - the question is when the classes
should
> be regenerated? First creation can be done on package installation. But
> what to do if one want to regenerate later (possible remotely).
It could be done on demand, driven automatically from the PCP side (as
those services are notified when new metric hierarchies come and go),
or from something as simple as a cron job rerunning the generation and
registration scripts.
Regenerating only when the change really happens sounds optimal to me. How
often such thing happen? Only on boot? Or any time?
> I think we should at least have CIM API for regenerating this
class
> list.
You mean a MOF class method of some sort? Are those ever run with
sufficient privilege to reconfigure the CIM server?
Yes, I meant to have something like LMI_PcpConfigurationService with method
Reconfigure. It should be doable but I really like the first approach
(regenerate when something changes) more.
> 2) What about WS-Man? This model won't work with WS-Man,
because WS-Man
> doesn't have EnumerateClasses. Do we care about WS-Man?
(I'm sorry, I don't know what this implies.) Is there some other
enumeration function I could add into the proof-of-concept to let WS-Man
get at the data?
This question was aimed to the rest of openlmi team. I really don't know if
we're going to target WS-Man. If so, we should consider it when modeling
stuff.
> 3) I would rather see some internal logic instead of having
direct 1:1
> export of pcp metrics. E.g. association between network.interface.*
> metric and CIM representation of given network interface
> (IPNetworkConnection). I think we should follow CIM modelling more
> closely.
The way I've been thinking about this is that this kind of domain
knowledge could be encoded into those CIM models rather than into the
generic PCP bridge. For example, would it be possible for the OpenLMI
IPNetworkConnection code to redirect some statistics inquiries to the
PCP_Metric_XXX it knows about.
This sound reasonable, however we won't be following the CIM modeling. For
network statistics there is standard CIM class CIM_EthernetPortStatistics [1]
that provides compatible access to network port statistics.
If we use PCP bridge directly we're going to lose object-level compatibility
with CIM schema. I don't know how much do we care about it. tsmetana, jsafrane
- what do you think?
Radek Novacek
[1]
http://schemas.dmtf.org/wbem/cim-html/2.35.0+/CIM_EthernetPortStatistics....