Fate of pgsnmpd

Florian G. Pflug wrote:

Hi

Does anyone know if pgsnmpd is still actively developed?
The last version (0.1b1) is about 15 months old.

there seems to be quite a lot of work going on in the cvs tree:

http://cvs.pgfoundry.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb.cgi/pgsnmpd/pgsnmpd/

so i would guess it is still active though without an release for a while.

Stefan

------- Original Message -------
From: "Florian G. Pflug" <fgp@phlo.org>
To: "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Sent: 06/04/07, 20:12:39
Subject: [HACKERS] Fate of pgsnmpd

Hi

Does anyone know if pgsnmpd is still actively developed?
The last version (0.1b1) is about 15 months old.

Yes, it is. There have been a number of commits recently and I believe Josh(?) is giving a talk about it at pgCon.

Regards, Dave

Florian G. Pflug wrote:

Hi

Does anyone know if pgsnmpd is still actively developed?
The last version (0.1b1) is about 15 months old.

It is.
There is a team (Josh Tolley, me and Hiroshi Saito) working for RFC 1697
compliance. When that's done, there are some other additions in the
pipeline.

There's been a rewrite of several things since 0.1b1, and what we have
now is not ready for production use. But it will be :-)

//Magnus

On 4/6/07, Dave Page <dpage@postgresql.org> wrote:

Yes, it is. There have been a number of commits recently and I believe Josh(?) is giving a talk about it at pgCon.

Regards, Dave

Josh just found his passport, which will make giving that talk a lot
easier ;) As Magnus said, we're aiming at RFC 1697 compliance first.
Since the RFC's MIB is designed to apply to *any* database, it doesn't
cover lots of the specific statistics a pgsql person would likely want
to see, so after the RFC work is done we'll be adding a pgsql-specific
MIB..

- Josh Tolley

On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 06:01:10AM -0600, Josh Tolley wrote:

Josh just found his passport, which will make giving that talk a lot
easier ;) As Magnus said, we're aiming at RFC 1697 compliance first.
Since the RFC's MIB is designed to apply to *any* database, it doesn't
cover lots of the specific statistics a pgsql person would likely want
to see, so after the RFC work is done we'll be adding a pgsql-specific
MIB..

I might be interested in contributing to this effort, if not with
code then at least with discussion and testing. I'm currently using
MRTG to execute Perl scripts that query the statistics views and
I've been thinking about rewriting those scripts to be AgentX
subagents so they'd be queryable via SNMP.

--
Michael Fuhr

Michael Fuhr wrote:

On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 06:01:10AM -0600, Josh Tolley wrote:

Josh just found his passport, which will make giving that talk a lot
easier ;) As Magnus said, we're aiming at RFC 1697 compliance first.
Since the RFC's MIB is designed to apply to *any* database, it doesn't
cover lots of the specific statistics a pgsql person would likely want
to see, so after the RFC work is done we'll be adding a pgsql-specific
MIB..

I might be interested in contributing to this effort, if not with
code then at least with discussion and testing. I'm currently using
MRTG to execute Perl scripts that query the statistics views and
I've been thinking about rewriting those scripts to be AgentX
subagents so they'd be queryable via SNMP.

We're definitely interested in listening :-) Please join us over at the
pgsnmpd list.

//Magnus

Josh,

Josh just found his passport, which will make giving that talk a lot
easier ;) As Magnus said, we're aiming at RFC 1697 compliance first.
Since the RFC's MIB is designed to apply to *any* database, it doesn't
cover lots of the specific statistics a pgsql person would likely want
to see, so after the RFC work is done we'll be adding a pgsql-specific
MIB..

FYI, the MySQL folks want to talk to you about maybe lobbying to change the
RFC. They feel that an awful lot of RFC1697 is Oracle-specific, and are
wondering if we can do anything about it.

Anyway, if you want to ping them, Brian Aker <brian@mysql.com>.

--
--Josh

Josh Berkus
PostgreSQL @ Sun
San Francisco

On 4/7/07, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:

FYI, the MySQL folks want to talk to you about maybe lobbying to change the
RFC. They feel that an awful lot of RFC1697 is Oracle-specific, and are
wondering if we can do anything about it.

Indeed... I've had brief discussions with a Mark Atwood, IIRC, who's
working on the MySQL implementation. I'll drop them a line, and cc
pgsnmpd-devel. Thanks.

- Josh Tolley