Hi,
Is table discovery really that painful operation for PostgreSQL or is
monitoring them overly painful in PostgreSQL? I think your discussion
applies to many DBs though. What properties should be monitored per table?
Should they just be disabled by default? In SQL Server this is pretty
painless operation, no matter how many resources are discovered
automatically (as the operational schemas just return more rows, this is
quick operation and I assume MySQL has the same sort of discovery options).
In the UI, auto-grouping them and hiding them works quite well. Sure, it
theory you could add hundreds, maybe thousands of tables (I know
theoretical limits are huge, but in reality it's uncommon to see that many
tables, as often table partitioning is used instead).
And are you proposing manual-discovery of each table, or manual-discovery
to find all the tables? Should all the DB plugins use the same principle?
- Micke
On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 12:19 PM, Thomas Segismont <tsegismo(a)redhat.com>wrote:
Hi,
What do you think about auto-discovery of Postgres table resources?
In my opinion it's not a good idea, most serious applications involve a
great number of tables and monitoring them all is probably not desired.
I'd like to disable auto-discovery and implement manual import. Please
shout if you disagree.
Thanks,
Thomas
_______________________________________________
rhq-devel mailing list
rhq-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-devel