Creating separate processes for API workers does allow a bit more room for RPC message processing in the main process. If this isn't enough and the main process is still bound on CPU and/or green thread/sqlalchemy blocking then creating separate worker processes for RPC processing may be the next logical step to scale. I'll give it some thought today and possibly create a blueprint.
Carl On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Maru Newby <ma...@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Dec 5, 2013, at 6:43 AM, Carl Baldwin <c...@ecbaldwin.net> wrote: > >> I have offered up https://review.openstack.org/#/c/60082/ as a >> backport to Havana. Interest was expressed in the blueprint for doing >> this even before this thread. If there is consensus for this as the >> stop-gap then it is there for the merging. However, I do not want to >> discourage discussion of other stop-gap solutions like what Maru >> proposed in the original post. >> >> Carl > > Awesome. No worries, I'm still planning on submitting a patch to improve > notification reliability. > > We seem to be cpu bound now in processing RPC messages. Do you think it > would be reasonable to run multiple processes for RPC? > > > m. > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
