Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Tweak metric naming for file_* and *_now values #73

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 18, 2017
Merged

Conversation

joehandzik
Copy link
Contributor

Addresses issue #72 by removing plurality, moving from file to inode for naming purposes, and removing all cases of appending _now to metrics to denote instantaneous values.

Signed-Off-By: Joe Handzik joseph.t.handzik@hpe.com

Copy link
Contributor

@roclark roclark left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just some of my thoughts, feel free to take or leave them as you see fit. As always, great work Mr. @joehandzik !

{"filesfree", "files_free_now", "The number of inodes (objects) available", s.gaugeMetric},
{"filestotal", "file_capacity", "The maximum number of inodes (objects) the filesystem can hold", s.gaugeMetric},
{"degraded", "degraded", "Binary indicator as to whether or not the pool is degraded - 0 for not degraded, 1 for degraded", s.gaugeMetric},
{"filesfree", "inode_free", "The number of inodes (objects) available", s.gaugeMetric},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This might be an unpopular opinion, but I prefer inodes_free here. I interpret inode_free to mean whether a particular inode is free or not (which doesn't make sense), but that's just me.

{"filestotal", "file_capacity", "The maximum number of inodes (objects) the filesystem can hold", s.gaugeMetric},
{"degraded", "degraded", "Binary indicator as to whether or not the pool is degraded - 0 for not degraded, 1 for degraded", s.gaugeMetric},
{"filesfree", "inode_free", "The number of inodes (objects) available", s.gaugeMetric},
{"filestotal", "inode_capacity", "The maximum number of inodes (objects) the filesystem can hold", s.gaugeMetric},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Same as above, inodes_capacity is a little more straightforward in my mind.

{"filestotal", "file_capacity", "The maximum number of inodes (objects) the filesystem can hold", s.gaugeMetric},
{"kbytesavail", "kilobytes_available_now", "Number of kilobytes readily available in the pool", s.gaugeMetric},
{"kbytesfree", "kilobytes_free_now", "Number of kilobytes allocated to the pool", s.gaugeMetric},
{"filesfree", "inode_free", "The number of inodes (objects) available", s.gaugeMetric},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See above.

{"kbytesavail", "kilobytes_available_now", "Number of kilobytes readily available in the pool", s.gaugeMetric},
{"kbytesfree", "kilobytes_free_now", "Number of kilobytes allocated to the pool", s.gaugeMetric},
{"filesfree", "inode_free", "The number of inodes (objects) available", s.gaugeMetric},
{"filestotal", "inode_capacity", "The maximum number of inodes (objects) the filesystem can hold", s.gaugeMetric},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See above.

{"filestotal", "file_capacity", "The maximum number of inodes (objects) the filesystem can hold", s.gaugeMetric},
{"kbytesavail", "kilobytes_available_now", "Number of kilobytes readily available in the pool", s.gaugeMetric},
{"kbytesfree", "kilobytes_free_now", "Number of kilobytes allocated to the pool", s.gaugeMetric},
{"filesfree", "inode_free", "The number of inodes (objects) available", s.gaugeMetric},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See above.

{"kbytesavail", "kilobytes_available_now", "Number of kilobytes readily available in the pool", s.gaugeMetric},
{"kbytesfree", "kilobytes_free_now", "Number of kilobytes allocated to the pool", s.gaugeMetric},
{"filesfree", "inode_free", "The number of inodes (objects) available", s.gaugeMetric},
{"filestotal", "inode_capacity", "The maximum number of inodes (objects) the filesystem can hold", s.gaugeMetric},
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See above.

@joehandzik joehandzik force-pushed the wip-fix-issue-72 branch 2 times, most recently from fe93a7e to 9b001cb Compare May 17, 2017 20:28
@joehandzik
Copy link
Contributor Author

@roclark I agree and changed the metric back to 'inodes_free'. We'll wait to merge this until @knweiss gets a say. We could also consider renaming 'inode_capacity' to something like 'inodes_available' again, so both metrics are 'inodes_*'.

@roclark
Copy link
Contributor

roclark commented May 17, 2017

I think I prefer inodes_available to inode_capacity personally. Otherwise, this looks good to me!

Addresses issue #72 by removing plurality, moving from file to inode for naming purposes, and removing all cases of appending _now to metrics to denote instantaneous values.

Signed-Off-By: Joe Handzik <joseph.t.handzik@hpe.com>
@joehandzik
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ok, done, but with a slight change in plans. Instead of 'inodes_available', I used 'inodes_maximum' after talking with @roclark. We felt that inodes_available and inodes_free were too similar (and based on the help text, 'inodes_available' aren't really all available at all, hence the existence of inodes_free).

Long-winded, but hopefully that rationale makes sense.

Copy link
Contributor

@roclark roclark left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looking good!

@roclark roclark merged commit 983fb3c into master May 18, 2017
@joehandzik joehandzik deleted the wip-fix-issue-72 branch May 18, 2017 16:37
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants