Write an explicit "putting riemann into production" howto guide.

[aphyr]

A user writes:

I did get this working a couple of days ago. In the remote possibility that someone winds up here with the same issues, Here is what I had to fix:

1. In the upper right corner of the dashboard, I had to change the input box value from 127.0.0.1:5556 to my ec2 public dns: "ec2-....:5556". Note that the dashboard javascript web socket code pre-pends the "ws://", so do not put that on the server name above (or you get ws://ws://ec2...).
2. That stopped the lost connections I still did not get any data though. I found I had the grid query wrong. it was set to "all", when it should have been "true" (not enough RTFM). Anyways, on the main Riemann server console there was an error that pointed to this problem.
3. I also had problems sending events from a remote computer. The events port 5555 was not visible external to ec2 even though I had opened all the relevant ports on my Security Groups. To fix this, I had to change the "host" parameter to 0.0.0.0 in the riemann server etc/riemann.config file. This made the ports visible to ec2 LB.

After fixing these three things, everything worked.

Thanks

[blysik]

Is it possible that the server value could be populated based on something in the config?

[dch]

@aphyr I'd love to have a crack at doing this, I've got a pile of rough notes on dead trees already.

Ideally I'd like to do this initially on a github wiki in markdown if that's OK. It's much easier to iterate and get contributions from the community, and then move it over to the main docs once it converges.

Is that possible?

[ghost]

In my experience with open-source GH wikis, they tend to have 3 problems:

• Inconsistent with the source code
• Wildly varying quality
• Articles from far in the past can mislead users
• No review/gardening process--or incentives to do so

If you're volunteering to maintain the wiki documentation, I'm happy to enable it--but I'd much rather have PRs on the gh-pages branch instead. I'm pretty overwhelmed right now, and don't want to commit to an additional project to maintain. :-/

[dch]

On 6 May 2013 23:22, Kyle Kingsbury notifications@github.com wrote:

In my experience with open-source GH wikis, they tend to have 3 problems:

• Inconsistent with the source code
• Wildly varying quality
• Articles from far in the past can mislead users
• No review/gardening process--or incentives to do so

If you're volunteering to maintain the wiki documentation, I'm happy to
enable it--but I'd much rather have PRs on the gh-pages branch instead. I'm
pretty overwhelmed right now, and don't want to commit to an additional
project to maintain. :-/

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/131#issuecomment-17509085
.

That matches my experience of wikis also. I'm happy to maintain & collate
it for 3 months or so and then merge it back into the main project docs.
That's easily going to be long enough.

[aphyr]

Sounds good, fire away! :)