Date
1 - 5 of 5
Billing & Metering of app usage with Abacus
We want to integrate the metrics provided by Cloud Foundry with Abacus
<https://github.com/cloudfoundry-incubator/cf-abacus>. We plan to create a billing/metering integration layer that: - fetches the app usage events <http://apidocs.cloudfoundry.org/214/app_usage_events/list_all_app_usage_events.html> from CC - inserts runtime usage <https://github.com/cloudfoundry-incubator/cf-abacus/blob/master/doc/api.md#runtime-usage> data to Abacus The events should be processed to build usage data based on them. This is much like the idea outlined in Dr.Nic's blog <https://blog.starkandwayne.com/2015/01/22/billing-your-cloud-foundry-users/>. The integration layer can do this periodically. AFAIK Abacus provides usage reports <https://github.com/cloudfoundry-incubator/cf-abacus/blob/master/doc/api.md#usage-report> for the current month only and not for arbitrary period of time. This implies some restrictions to what we can report when the application is: 1. started and stopped several times in the month 2. started in the current month but not stopped at all 3. started in a previous month and not stopped The first problem can be solved by iterating through the events and finding the respective start and end timestamps that have to be reported to Abacus. The second issue might be solved by reporting small amounts of usage, stating from the last start event and continuing to report on every poll of the integration layer. For example we can report several usages: - start: 1438945112; end: 1438946000 (current time for the billing integration) - start: 1438946000 (previous reporting cycle); end: 1438947000 The third issue might be solved by finding the last start event and reporting in the same manner as with #2. Reporting usage in small steps might require persistence so we can store the end time of the previous reporting. We might use in-memory cache and reach to Abacus as primary storage. If Abacus can accumulate usage reporting we can even get rid of the persistence and cache. Is such integration in the scope of Abacus project? Regards, Hristo Iliev |
|
Piotr Przybylski <piotrp@...>
Hi, I am also looking at runtime submissions for Abacus, worked on it for
Bluemix, couple of points for discussion. In addition to usage events (start followed by stop), the scaling and duplicate events need to be handled. The former is a START followed by START with memory or instance count changed, the latter can be STOP followed by STOP. We also encountered a situation where the ordering is correct - START followed by STOP but the timestamp for the START is later than STOP. For the running applications - your points #2 and #3 are a working though it may generate fair amount of traffic, depending on frequency and number of running applications. Eventually we may want to look at alternatives, for example enhance metering to allow for time based submissions. Instead of continually submitting usage, submit the state of application - (STARTED, memory, instances), the metering could then calculate usage for that application based on the time passed until application is stopped. I think handling some of above scenarios requires persistence, even if to log CF events that were used for submission (or skipped). You may want to persist state to recovery from application failure or restart, as well as keep track of running/active applications. Thanks, Piotr Hristo Iliev <hsiliev(a)gmail.com> wrote on 08/07/2015 08:07:53 AM: We want to integrate the metrics provided by Cloud Foundry with Abacus. We plan to create a billing/metering integration layer that: AFAIK Abacus provides usage reports for the current month only and The second issue might be solved by reporting small amounts ofusages: start: 1438945112; end: 1438946000 (current time for the billingintegration) start: 1438946000 (previous reporting cycle); end: 1438947000 Reporting usage in small steps might require persistence so we cancache. Is such integration in the scope of Abacus project? |
|
CF Runtime
Piotr,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
The timestamps not being correct is a known limitation of how events are being generated, but as you said, order should be guaranteed (and timestamps should hopefully be close). Duplicate events are something I'm not aware of though. In theory only one API instance should be able to get a database lock on an app, and should not release it until it is done updating and has recorded the app usage event. Do you have any details on what caused duplicate events? Joseph OSS Release Integration Team On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Piotr Przybylski <piotrp(a)us.ibm.com> wrote:
Hi, I am also looking at runtime submissions for Abacus, worked on it for |
|
Piotr Przybylski <piotrp@...>
Joseph,
thank you, for the timestamps I just pointed it out as something that implementation must deal with, quite easily as the order is correct. For the duplicate events, I cannot say what causes them. It used to be simple to reproduce by (almost) simultaneously sending 'cf stop <app>' from two terminal windows. This does not 'work' any more (CF 210), however I see logged duplicate STARTED and STOPPED events - not too frequent, but still there. Somewhat surprisingly, for the two I looked at, the time difference is quite large - 2 minutes for STARTED and 15 minutes for STOPPED. Is there a way to determine how that happened without access to the application ? Piotr |------------> | From: | |------------> >-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |CF Runtime <cfruntime(a)gmail.com> | >-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | To: | |------------> >-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |"Discussions about Cloud Foundry projects and the system overall." <cf-dev(a)lists.cloudfoundry.org> | >-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Date: | |------------> >-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |08/12/2015 03:45 PM | >-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |------------> | Subject: | |------------> >-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| |[cf-dev] Re: Re: Billing & Metering of app usage with Abacus | >-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| Piotr, The timestamps not being correct is a known limitation of how events are being generated, but as you said, order should be guaranteed (and timestamps should hopefully be close). Duplicate events are something I'm not aware of though. In theory only one API instance should be able to get a database lock on an app, and should not release it until it is done updating and has recorded the app usage event. Do you have any details on what caused duplicate events? Joseph OSS Release Integration Team On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Piotr Przybylski <piotrp(a)us.ibm.com> wrote: Hi, I am also looking at runtime submissions for Abacus, worked on it for Bluemix, couple of points for discussion. In addition to usage events (start followed by stop), the scaling and duplicate events need to be handled. The former is a START followed by START with memory or instance count changed, the latter can be STOP followed by STOP. We also encountered a situation where the ordering is correct - START followed by STOP but the timestamp for the START is later than STOP. For the running applications - your points #2 and #3 are a working though it may generate fair amount of traffic, depending on frequency and number of running applications. Eventually we may want to look at alternatives, for example enhance metering to allow for time based submissions. Instead of continually submitting usage, submit the state of application - (STARTED, memory, instances), the metering could then calculate usage for that application based on the time passed until application is stopped. I think handling some of above scenarios requires persistence, even if to log CF events that were used for submission (or skipped). You may want to persist state to recovery from application failure or restart, as well as keep track of running/active applications. Thanks, Piotr Hristo Iliev <hsiliev(a)gmail.com> wrote on 08/07/2015 08:07:53 AM: > We want to integrate the metrics provided by Cloud Foundry with Abacus. > We plan to create a billing/metering integration layer that: > fetches the app usage events from CC > inserts runtime usage data to Abacus > The events should be processed to build usage data based on them. > This is much like the idea outlined in Dr.Nic's blog. The > integration layer can do this periodically. > AFAIK Abacus provides usage reports for the current month only and > not for arbitrary period of time. This implies some restrictions to > what we can report when the application is: > 1. started and stopped several times in the month > 2. started in the current month but not stopped at all > 3. started in a previous month and not stopped > The first problem can be solved by iterating through the events and > finding the respective start and end timestamps that have to be > reported to Abacus. > The second issue might be solved by reporting small amounts of > usage, stating from the last start event and continuing to report on > every poll of the integration layer. For example we can report several usages: > start: 1438945112; end: 1438946000 (current time for the billing integration) > start: 1438946000 (previous reporting cycle); end: 1438947000 > The third issue might be solved by finding the last start event and > reporting in the same manner as with #2. > Reporting usage in small steps might require persistence so we can > store the end time of the previous reporting. We might use in-memory > cache and reach to Abacus as primary storage. If Abacus can > accumulate usage reporting we can even get rid of the persistence and cache. > Is such integration in the scope of Abacus project? > > Regards, > Hristo Iliev |
|
CF Runtime
You might get some answers by querying the events api.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
http://apidocs.cloudfoundry.org/214/events/list_all_events.html You should be able to query it where the actee equals the guid of the app. Joseph OSS Release Integration Team On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 5:26 PM, Piotr Przybylski <piotrp(a)us.ibm.com> wrote:
Joseph, |
|