On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Andy Zhou <az...@ovn.org> wrote: > >> A single, dedicated etcd client handling every other transaction sounds >> like it could be a scale bottleneck. What do you think? >> > > Yeah, this is not ideal. Suggestions are welcome. >
I don't have any suggestions right now... > In OVN-SB use case, transactions are usually only issued by northd, write > update should not, at least in theory, be > the performance bottleneck. > At least for OpenStack, the most frequent operation will be creating or deleting logical ports. Each results in a transaction from both ovn-northd and ovn-controller right now. ovn-northd updates logical flows and creates a Port_Binding row (at least). ovn-controller updates the Port_Binding row to bind the port to a chassis. -- Russell Bryant
_______________________________________________ discuss mailing list discuss@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
