-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
TODO - Where I think about ways to make Unified Trees better.
- Loading branch information
Eric Stewart
committed
Dec 25, 2013
1 parent
a43baed
commit ab8ed6d
Showing
1 changed file
with
20 additions
and
0 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ | ||
This is where I theorize about what I may be doing with UT in the future. | ||
|
||
20131225 - Yes, thinking about stuff on Christmas. I'm beginning to wonder if | ||
a large number of tree sources might result in slow render times for UT. To | ||
avoid this, I'm thinking of setting up an optional "master/slave" setup, where: | ||
|
||
- The master pulls the trees from all the slaves on a regular basis - say, once | ||
an hour, and stores the built tree in a DB table or set of tables. | ||
- The slaves manage their own tables as normal, but instead of every individual | ||
Cacti install building the Unified Trees on their own, they would request the | ||
tree the master built. | ||
- This would simplify setup greatly; only the master would need access to all | ||
slaves; the slaves would only need to access the master's database. Since | ||
the slaves only pull the full tree from one source, render times should be | ||
minimal. | ||
|
||
Downside? Something added to a Cacti install since the last time the master | ||
built the tree will not show up on the table. | ||
|
||
Alternative? Possibly some way for the slaves to submit changes to the master. |