Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

perfsonar-user - Re: [perfsonar-user] Adding homegrown tools to perfsonar

Subject: perfSONAR User Q&A and Other Discussion

List archive

Re: [perfsonar-user] Adding homegrown tools to perfsonar


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Mark Feit <>
  • To: "Uhl, George D. (GSFC-423.0)[Arctic Slope Technical Services, Inc.]" <>, "" <>
  • Subject: Re: [perfsonar-user] Adding homegrown tools to perfsonar
  • Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 15:49:59 +0000

Uhl, George D. (GSFC-423.0)[Arctic Slope Technical Services, Inc.] writes:

 

I’m looking to add a homegrown tcp based RTT tool to perfsonar as a plugin.  I’m really having a hard time finding documentation on how to do this.  Is there a good reference on how to add new tools to perfsonar?

 

Most of the process is institutional knowledge, and we’re not to the point where we have a document suitable for anyone to pick up and use.  The pScheduler sources include a plugin development kit (PDK) that provides a skeleton that can be used for developing new plugins.   Implementing a new tool for an existing test isn’t difficult, and I’d be happy to walk you (and anyone else who wants to sit in) through the process using the PDK.

 

If your tool is TCP-based and requires a server running at the far end as the throughput tools do, that’s going to be a non-starter.  RTT is currently a single-participant test and there’s no way to shoehorn a two-participant test into it without create a separate-but-similar test.  (That said, making the selection of participants tool-based rather than test-based is an architectural change that would be some work, but not a back-breaker.)

 

Also note that the twping tool can do RTT and might be a good middle ground between ping and your tool.

 

--Mark

 




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page