Akihiro, thank you for your precious help!

Regarding the choice of Neutron as PoC, I'm sorry for not providing much details when I said "because of its specific data model", effectively the original mention was  "its API exposes things at an individual table level, requiring the client to join that information to get the answers they need".
I realize now such description probably applies to many OpenStack APIs.
So I'm not sure what was the reason for choosing Neutron.
I suppose Nova is also a good candidate because API is quite complex too, in a different way, and need to expose the data API and the control API plane as we discussed.

After all Neutron is maybe not the best candidate but it seems good enough.

And as Flint say the extension mechanism shouldn't be an issue.

So if someone believe there is a better candidate for the PoC, please speak now.

Thanks,
Gilles

PS: Flint,  Thank you for offering to be the advocate for Berlin. That's great!


On 06/05/18 02:23, Flint WALRUS wrote:
Hi Akihiro,

Thanks a lot for this insight on how neutron behave.

We would love to get support and backing from the neutron team in order to be able to get the best PoC possible.

Someone suggested neutron as a good choice because of it simple database model. As GraphQL can manage your behavior of an extension declaring its own schemes I don’t think it would take that much time to implement it.

@Gilles, if I goes to the berlin summitt I could definitely do the networking and relationship work needed to get support on our PoC from different teams members. This would help to spread the world multiple time and don’t have a long time before someone come to talk about this subject as what happens with the 2015 talk of the Facebook speaker.

Le sam. 5 mai 2018 à 18:05, Akihiro Motoki <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> a écrit :

    Hi,

    I am happy to see the effort to explore a new API mechanism.
    I would like to see good progress and help effort as API liaison
    from the neutron team.

    > Neutron has been selected for the PoC because of its specific
    data model

    On the other hand, I am not sure this is the right reason to
    choose 'neutron' only from this reason. I would like to note "its
    specific data model" is not the reason that makes the progress of
    API versioning slowest in the OpenStack community. I believe it is
    worth recognized as I would like not to block the effort due to
    the neutron-specific reasons.
    The most complicated point in the neutron API is that the neutron
    API layer allows neutron plugins to declare which features are
    supported. The neutron API is a collection of API extensions
    defined in the neutron-lib repo and each neutron plugin can
    declare which subset(s) of the neutron APIs are supported. (For
    more detail, you can check how the neutron API extension mechanism
    is implemented). It is not defined only by the neutron API layer.
    We need to communicate which API features are supported by
    communicating enabled service plugins.

    I am afraid that most efforts to explore a new mechanism in
    neutron will be spent to address the above points which is not
    directly related to GraphQL itself.
    Of course, it would be great if you overcome long-standing
    complicated topics as part of GraphQL effort :)

    I am happy to help the effort and understand how the neutron API
    is defined.

    Thanks,
    Akihiro


    2018年5月5日(土) 18:16 Gilles Dubreuil <[email protected]
    <mailto:[email protected]>>:

        Hello,

        Few of us recently discussed [1] how GraphQL [2], the next
        evolution
        from REST, could transform OpenStack APIs for the better.
        Effectively we believe OpenStack APIs provide perfect use
        cases for
        GraphQL DSL approach, to bring among other advantages, better
        performance and stability, easier developments and
        consumption, and with
        GraphQL Schema provide automation capabilities never achieved
        before.

        The API SIG suggested to start an API GraphQL Proof of Concept
        (PoC) to
        demonstrate the capabilities before eventually extend GraphQL
        to other
        projects.
        Neutron has been selected for the PoC because of its specific
        data model.

        So if you are interested, please join us.
        For those who can make it, we'll also discuss this during the
        SIG API
        BoF at OpenStack Summit at Vancouver [3]

        To learn more about GraphQL, check-out howtographql.com
        <http://howtographql.com> [4].

        So let's get started...


        [1]
        http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2018-May/130054.html
        [2] http://graphql.org/
        [3]
        
https://www.openstack.org/summit/vancouver-2018/summit-schedule/events/21798/api-special-interest-group-session
        [4] https://www.howtographql.com/

        Regards,
        Gilles



        
__________________________________________________________________________
        OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
        Unsubscribe:
        [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
        <http://[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe>
        http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

    __________________________________________________________________________
    OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
    Unsubscribe:
    [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
    <http://[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe>
    http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev


--
Gilles Dubreuil
Senior Software Engineer - Red Hat - Openstack DFG Integration
Email: [email protected]
GitHub/IRC: gildub
Mobile: +61 400 894 219

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to