From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7129461816 for ; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 08:58:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 601F82F5B7 for ; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 08:57:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [212.186.127.180]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id B89932F5AB for ; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 08:57:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7C89944A7B; Mon, 7 Sep 2020 08:57:32 +0200 (CEST) To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Victor Hooi References: From: Thomas Lamprecht Message-ID: Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2020 08:57:31 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:81.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/81.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 1.204 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -2.69 Looks like a legit reply (A) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] Telegraf added in-built Proxmox support - thoughts versus our external metric support? X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2020 06:58:04 -0000 Hi, On 07.09.20 03:42, Victor Hooi wrote: > I know that Proxmox has it's own inbuilt InfluxDB client: >=20 > https://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/External_Metric_Server >=20 > However, Telegraf recently added first-party support for Proxmox: >=20 > https://github.com/influxdata/telegraf/tree/master/plugins/inputs/proxm= ox great! > Telegraf lets you output to InfluxDB, Graphite, Prometheus, as well as = a > bunch of others (Telegraf in-built output clients > ) >=20 > What do you think of using the above and contributing to that, instead = of > maintaining our own Proxmox InfluxDB support? >=20 > Or are there advantages to maintaining our own code here? The pvestatd, which queries statistics periodically, does also the sendin= g of said statistics without extra overhead. API request may get, at least partially, up to date information with an extra overhead, e.g., if storag= e stats are to be queried too. That could be addressed by providing a pvest= atd fed cache in /run (fast memory tmpfs) or so and provide access to that ov= er the API. Anyway, I do not think that we should drop our direct plugins (yet), some= people like me, are happy feeding directly to InfluxDB without anything in-between. But, we definitively want to mention this in the documentation and see ho= w we can improve integration. cheers, Thomas