[collectd] apache and collectd plugin

[Amit Gupta]

On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 3:09 PM, Bruno Prémont
<bonbons at linux-vserver.org> wrote:
> I would say neither is the best approach...
>
> The best way to solve it would probably be to have apache plugin use
> different configuration layout:
>
> e.g.
> <Apache>
>  <Host "apache.domain.org">
>    Url ...
>  </Host>
>  <Host "lightttpd.domain.org">
>    Url ...
>  </Host>
>  Url ...
> </Apache>
>
> This way the <Host> blocks could be specified to denote different
> servers (the code parsing status page would make distinction between
> apache and lighttpd and collectd available statistics (as it does
> already , at least partially)
>
> The layout could also be like this (better?):
> <Apache>
>  <Server>
>    Host  "www.domain.org"
>    Instance ""
>    Url ...
>  </Server>
>  <Server>
>    Host "www.domain.org"
>    Instance "8080"
>    Url ...
>  </Server>
>  Url ...
> </Apache>
>
> This would allow specifying the host name for which the apache plugin
> collects statistics and differentiate between to web-server processes
> on the same host with different instances.
> Default instance would be "" and default host would be collectd's host
> name.
>
> The configuration outside of <Server> block would continue working as
> it does not but be handled as if it was enclosed with <Server> block
> (and using default values for Host and Instance)
>
>
> This kind of thought could also be applied to other plugins that can
> collect remote data...
>
> Bruno
>

Hi Bruno,
Thanks for your suggestions. I suggested a separate plugin since I
want lighttpd and apache rrd files to sit under their respective
directories. However, I do notice that some of the plugins generate
different directories for rrd files e.g cpu plugin, so we could
probably do the same for apache plugin as well.

Also, given that we want apache plugin to work with multiple servers,
do we want to name it as httpd or something similar?.

Regards
Amit