aurora-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Maxim Khutornenko <ma...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [proposal] Deprecate the Thermos CLI
Date Wed, 18 Feb 2015 17:19:29 GMT
> Moving parts should either provide value or be obliterated from our source tree.

I generally agree. In this particular case it's still unclear to me -
in the absence of Thermos CLI and Observer, how do we conduct live
site executor/thermos troubleshooting?

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>  I think we would be better served by advertising it as an
>> optional component that provides operators and users with debugging
>> ability.
>
>
> Slightly tangential discussion, but i think we should be very skeptical of
> fringe components.  Moving parts should either provide value or be
> obliterated from our source tree.
>
> -=Bill
>
> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 6:51 PM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> One thing I would like to point out is the thermos CLI is not required for
>> Aurora operation. I think we would be better served by advertising it as an
>> optional component that provides operators and users with debugging
>> ability.
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 6:38 PM, Joseph Smith <yasumoto7@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I believe it absolutely is- ideally as we deprecate the Observer, we can
>> > then lean on the Mesos Slave for this information instead. This will
>> > further decrease the number of moving pieces, simplifying the operation
>> of
>> > an Aurora/Mesos cluster.
>> >
>> > > On Feb 17, 2015, at 6:33 PM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Joe,
>> > >
>> > > If I understand Brian's proposal correctly <
>> > >
>> >
>> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/aurora-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCAFTdr0DZvH21tR=NLK0qP-Y9-oL9SyULy6GLah=CApuW0SVvnw@mail.gmail.com%3E
>> > >,
>> > > we are going to depreciate the Observer. This combined with your
>> proposal
>> > > will make the executor the only component that can read the thermos
>> > > checkpoints and produce some output that is human readable. Is that
>> > > something we want to do?
>> > >
>> > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Joseph Smith <yasumoto7@gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Hi everyone,
>> > >>
>> > >> After reviewing the functionality offered by the Thermos Commandline
>> > tool
>> > >> vs. what’s exported via the Thermos Observer, I was hoping to bring
>> up a
>> > >> question I had:
>> > >>
>> > >> Can we deprecate the Thermos CLI?
>> > >>
>> > >> Removing this would decrease the number of components required for
a
>> > >> functional Aurora installation (a huge victory, in my opinion) and
>> also
>> > >> enable the Observer to fully take over the duty of providing
>> visibility
>> > >> into what’s running on a most. In addition, maintenance is performed
>> via
>> > >> the HostMaintenance API <
>> > >>
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-aurora/blob/master/src/main/python/apache/aurora/admin/host_maintenance.py#L26
>> > >
>> > >> and should not be done using thermos kill, which would cause LOST
>> tasks.
>> > >>
>> > >> That said, removing this tool makes it much more difficult for Thermos
>> > to
>> > >> be used as a monit <http://mmonit.com/monit/> replacement, which
is
>> > >> actually rather feasible now. In addition, it also forces people to
>> > >> remember + learn the port the Observer is running on in order to get
>> > >> information about tasks.
>> > >>
>> > >> Any thoughts and opinions would be much appreciated!
>> > >>
>> > >> Thanks!
>> > >> Joe
>> > >>
>> > >> --
>> > >> Zameer Manji
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> >
>> > --
>> > Zameer Manji
>> >
>> >
>>

Mime
View raw message