On 07/26/2013 11:53 AM, Ben Nemec wrote: > On 2013-07-26 10:39, Jay Pipes wrote: >> On 07/26/2013 08:04 AM, Sean Dague wrote: >>> On 07/25/2013 08:30 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote: >>>> When you have so much state to maintain then aren't the APIs >>>> incorrect?? >>> >>> Yes, the EC2 APIs are incorrect in being silly and using ints for ids >>> for so many things, also for supporting people to make GET requests with >>> 16k get strings. But there isn't much we can do about that. :) >>> >>>> Or can there be new API's that expose this translation, something >>>> seems/feels wrong if there is so much state to maintain u can't do a >>>> translation layer. >>> >>> Most of this is about id allocation and translation. OpenStack uses >>> UUIDs, AWS uses ints. UUIDs is a better design point, and means you >>> don't need to have a global auto allocator which you can guaruntee, >>> which is good. >>> >>> Also there are EC2 design points that have request lengths greater than >>> what Apache (or any other web front end) is compiled to support, as they >>> have the possibility of enourmous GET strings (16K at least). Again, >>> instead of sensibly requiring to move to POST in those cases. I know we >>> had to land a change for CERN to allow bigger requests on EC2 calls for >>> just this reason (we did keep the get length apache sized on OSAPI, so >>> we didn't break people's attempts to get this behind a real web server). >>> >>> Translation is never exact, go talk to the WINE folks about that one. >>> >>> I'm personally fine either way, proxy or embedded in openstack. Which >>> approach isn't really the issue. It's that no one is doing the work. >>> Actions speak much louder than words (well... except in pundit echo >>> chambers), so I'd much rather have people with strong opinions on this >>> express how strongly those are by having a big patch queue for me to >>> review. >> >> Amen that that. >> >> However, I will say that developers write code to scratch an itch -- >> or some product manager's itch. So the fact that nobody is all that >> interested in spending time to code up enhanced EC2 API support in >> Nova is, well, quite telling that the demand for such things is less >> than what some people think. > > I'm not sure this is a safe assumption to make. It's only natural that > the companies/people who are working on OpenStack would be more > interested in the OS API, but that doesn't mean there aren't AWS users > out there who would like to migrate off but don't have the expertise to > contribute to OpenStack. > > None of which changes the fact that without developer interest nothing > is going to get done, but I still think it's important to keep in mind > that developer interest does not necessarily equal user interest. The > fact that nobody is currently working on it doesn't mean there isn't an > opportunity here.
If that demand is communicated by customers to vendors contributing to OpenStack, and it is a higher priority than other things customers are asking for, it will get worked on. That just hasn't seemed to be the case based on contribution activity. -- Russell Bryant _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
