Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 15, 2021. It is now read-only.

Collecting data through insights-upload (topological_inventory-sync) #74

Open
slemrmartin opened this issue Mar 6, 2020 · 5 comments
Open

Comments

@slemrmartin
Copy link
Contributor

slemrmartin commented Mar 6, 2020

ISSUE TYPE

  • Feature Idea

Following discussion with @Ladas and ansible/awx#5931


SUMMARY

Full refresh through AnsibleTower collector <-> Tower API makes big traffic to Tower.
And through receptor it'll be quite slow.
So there is an idea to collect data through insights-upload service.

DETAILS

@slemrmartin
Copy link
Contributor Author

cc @iphands @gtanzillo @Ladas @agrare

@Ladas
Copy link
Contributor

Ladas commented Mar 6, 2020

If you want to use dataset already sent by tower into cloud.redhat.com, please create issue in https://github.com/ansible/awx/issues/ and we can go through what's missing

job_templates(unified so workflows templates and templates), jobs (unified), workflow_job_nodes and workflow_job_template_nodes are already implemented and will be sent to c.r.c

You should use data that are already being sent to c.r.c ingress service (done in a very effective way, considering perf impact on the tower cluster itself) and not do another full API scanning (that will have perf impact to tower clusters, since we are talking about hundreds of thousands - dozens of millions of records for bigger customers)

@slemrmartin
Copy link
Contributor Author

slemrmartin commented Mar 6, 2020

I'm thinking if topo and catalog need collecting all jobs, are they used somehow?
If we'll have targeted refresh, we'll sync only jobs ordered by catalog. And we can skip these dozens of millions records in our db

@gtanzillo
Copy link
Contributor

This approach seems like it would be much more efficient and manageable from the standpoint of topology. It takes the burden of getting Tower inventory to c.r.c off of Topo. I believe we originally considered this as one of two potential approaches but timeframes, limited resources and other factors to us pushed in the receptor direction. I think it's definitely worth pursuing.

@Ladas
Copy link
Contributor

Ladas commented Mar 6, 2020

@gtanzillo so the main reason to not go with this path for me was, that just a subset of data was available (basically just list of templates and jobs, from what we need). Now I am in a position to fix that, so this path becomes viable :-D

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants