Article written by

Nick is VP of Products at eNovance and was one of the founder of the Ceilometer project. When not geeking or traveling for business, Nick loves a good book, cycling, sailing and photography.

7 Responses

  1. OpenStack Community Weekly Newsletter (Aug 30 – Sep 6) » The OpenStack Blog

    […] History, objectives and limits of the Ceilometer project […]

  2. OpenStack Community Weekly Newsletter (Aug 30 – Sep 6) | Keep America At Work

    […] History, objectives and limits of the Ceilometer project […]

  3. OpenStack社区周报(8.4 – 9.11) | UnitedStack Inc.

    […] Ceilometer项目的历史,宗旨和限制 […]

  4. History, objectives and limits of the Ceilometer project | OpenStackうぉっち

    […] History, objectives and limits of the Ceilometer project. […]

  5. rajan
    rajan at | | Reply

    every thing is fine but in collecting the data swift and nova polled and that connected to agent why polled that nova and swift what happend in that polled please helped in this

  6. Xi Nuatmei
    Xi Nuatmei at | | Reply

    As we encounter several deception using ceilometer:
    – uncontrolled time drifting due to non compensated offset
    – lack of real-life usable alarm (beyond threshold since x minutes, there is just nothing)
    – consistency of the API (did the ptl ever read hateos specification ?)

    – and many other
    I really would like to know what you, as primary contributor to ceilometer/telemetry, can say about a realistic future for Ceilometer.
    You may or may not be aware that some credible people are also circumspect about ceilometer.
    Most notable posts includes:
    http://stochasticresonance.wordpress.com/2013/11/04/openstack-a-plea/
    http://readwrite.com/2013/11/18/can-openstack-be-saved-from-itself#awesm=~owJldLhCpu6gIO

    It would be great if you can go forward and drive ceilometer to a corporate grade product.

Please comment with your real name using good manners.

Leave a Reply