On 06/30/2015 04:42 AM, Gal Sagie wrote: > Hi Justin, > > The idea was not to choose one database implementation over the other, > but design things in such a way > that its pluggable, so in terms of OVN, switching between > implementations is transparent (as much as possible) > > I think that different setups can have different scale criteria and > might need different DB solutions. > > I think the IDL library (the python and C implementations) will be > rather easy to adjust as OVSDB have clear API > > So doing this work now, we can easily change and experiments with > different DB solutions
Ben and Justin have made a pretty good case that this is a premature since we really haven't done much real testing to see how ovsdb-server scales. This could potentially be a pretty big distraction and I'm not sure it's worth it. I don't think adding this later will be significantly more difficult than it is today if it's needed. If someone wants to do some experimentation in the short term, it's certainly possible. There is an API generated from the ovsdb schema that you could re-implement. It might be better time spent to think about OVN testing and how we can do good, reproducible scale tests. Ben has done some awesome work here, but it seems we may need to a multi-node environment since at some point it sounds like the number of processes on a single host becomes a problem in the simulated test env. -- Russell Bryant _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
