[Roger] Hi Stephen! Great job! Obviously your experience is both awesome and essential here.
I would ask that we add a historical archive (physically implemented as a log file, probably) object to your model. When you mentioned sending data off to Ceilometer, that triggered me to think about one problem I have had to deal with is "what packet went where? " in diagnosing errors usually related to having a bug on 1 out of 5 load-balanced servers, usually because of a deployed version mismatch, but could also be due to virus. When our customer sees "hey every now and then this image is broken on a web page" that points us to an inconsistent farm, and having the ability to trace or see which server got that customer's packet (routed to by the LB) would really help in pinpointing the errant server. > Benefits of a new model > > If we were to adopt either of these data models, this would enable us to > eventually support the following feature sets, in the following ways (for > example): > > Automated scaling of load-balancer services > [Roger] Would the Heat module be called on to add more LB's to the farm? > I talked about horizontal scaling of load balancers above under "High > Availability," but, at least in the case of a software appliance, vertical > scaling should also be possible in an active-standby cluster_model by ****************************************** _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
