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

[docker] Add recipe and tests #197

merged 1 commit into from Apr 17, 2015


None yet
2 participants
Copy link

DorianZaccaria commented Apr 13, 2015

Add a recipe to create an agent configuration file in order to monitor docker. The attributes available are:

datadog: {
  docker: {
    init_config: {
      docker_root: '/',
      socket_timeout: 10
    instances: [
        url: 'unix://var/run/docker.sock',
        new_tag_names: 'false',
        tag_by_command: 'false',
        tags: ['toto', 'tata'],
        include: ['docker_image:ubuntu', 'docker_image:debian'],
        exclude: ['.*'],
        collect_events: 'true',
        collect_container_size: 'false',
        collect_all_metrics: 'false',
        collect_images_stats: 'false',
<% end -%>

<% @instances.each do |i| -%>

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

miketheman Apr 14, 2015


This is cool, but I think I tried to explain that we should try to use the more flexible method as seen in newer examples like this one where the instances hash is rendered directly from attributes structure, instead of us needing to change & release whenever an Agent check adds/changes a config flag.

I've been trying to think how this might work for init_config as well, have not figured that out yet.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

DorianZaccaria Apr 14, 2015

Author Contributor

In that case we don't have any default value for url and new_tag_name. Can we suppose it is users responsibility to always define these attributes?

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

miketheman Apr 14, 2015


I think we do have many cases where the user is shown an example in the recipe. See here for an example of the http check:

This seems to be a better interface for now, and soon enough we might be able to replace a large amount of identical template files with one standardized file that any monitor would use.
I am considering a breaking change for a 3.0.0 release where we would convert all existing templates and move them to this method. But that's longer term.

@DorianZaccaria DorianZaccaria force-pushed the feature/docker branch from 2349ae3 to 212a101 Apr 15, 2015

@DorianZaccaria DorianZaccaria added this to the v2.1.0 milestone Apr 16, 2015

miketheman added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 17, 2015

Merge pull request #197 from DataDog/feature/docker
[docker] Add recipe and tests

@miketheman miketheman merged commit b33b87e into master Apr 17, 2015

2 checks passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
continuous-integration/travis-ci/push The Travis CI build passed

@miketheman miketheman referenced this pull request Apr 17, 2015


adding docker file #150

@miketheman miketheman deleted the feature/docker branch Apr 20, 2015

@DorianZaccaria DorianZaccaria restored the feature/docker branch Apr 24, 2015

@miketheman miketheman deleted the feature/docker branch Jul 4, 2015

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.