Thank you for the detailed updates on your progress! On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 2:18 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org> wrote:
> My proposal is this: > > 1. Postpone the OVN etcd vs. Raft decision to the next release cycle in > 6 months. This will give etcd and its underlying infrastructure time > to mature, and in the alternative it will give proper time to > implement Raft in OVSDB. > > 2. Prioritize getting HPE's OVSDB replication patches into this current > cycle. I do not think I've seen a revision of the patches since > March, so the first step would be to ask for a new version, and in > the alternative I'll take a look at revising them myself. > > Comments? > This sounds quite reasonable to me. Roughly given choices of: a) branch in July with active/passive HA for OVSDB b) aim for etcd or ovsdb+raft, but no HA when we branch in July c) aim for etcd or ovsdb+raft, and delay release until properly ready I am definitely in favor of (a). I think it's important to put out some regular releases that show our progress. Active/passive HA is still a significant upgrade over the current state. Having that and an on time release is still a successful milestone in my book. As briefly mentioned in the meeting today, one of our big questions will be whether OVN is still experimental or not. I'd love to take off the experimental label. To do so, I think we either need to be confident that the northbound interface won't change (will remain OVSDB), or that we can provide a reasonable automated migration path from OVSDB to etcd. On the surface, providing a migration seems reasonable enough. Thanks, -- Russell Bryant -- Russell Bryant
_______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
