>From Operators point of view i'd love to see less technology proliferation in OpenStack, if you wear the developer hat please don't be selfish, take into account the others :)
ZK is a robust technology but hey is a beast like Rabbit, there is a lot to massage and over 2 data centers ZK is not very efficient. On Sat, Aug 1, 2015 at 4:27 AM, Joshua Harlow <harlo...@outlook.com> wrote: > Monty Taylor wrote: > >> On 08/01/2015 03:40 AM, Mike Perez wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 8:56 AM, Joshua Harlow<harlo...@outlook.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> ...random thought here, skip as needed... in all honesty orchestration >>>> solutions like mesos >>>> (http://mesos.apache.org/assets/img/documentation/architecture3.jpg), >>>> map-reduce solutions like hadoop, stream processing systems like apache >>>> storm (...), are already using zookeeper and I'm not saying we should >>>> just >>>> use it cause they are, but the likelihood that they just picked it for >>>> no >>>> reason are imho slim. >>>> >>> I'd really like to see focus cross project. I don't want Ceilometer to >>> depend on Zoo Keeper, Cinder to depend on etcd, etc. This is not ideal >>> for an operator to have to deploy, learn and maintain each of these >>> solutions. >>> >>> I think this is difficult when you consider everyone wants options of >>> their preferred DLM. If we went this route, we should pick one. >>> >>> Regardless, I want to know if we really need a DLM. Does Ceilometer >>> really need a DLM? Does Cinder really need a DLM? Can we just use a >>> hash ring solution where operators don't even have to know or care >>> about deploying a DLM and running multiple instances of Cinder manager >>> just works? >>> >> >> I'd like to take that one step further and say that we should also look >> holistically at the other things that such technology are often used for >> in distributed systems and see if, in addition to "Does Cinder need a >> DLM" - ask "does Cinder need service discover" and "does Cinder need >> distributed KV store" and does anyone else? >> >> Adding something like zookeeper or etcd or consul has the potential to >> allow us to design an OpenStack that works better. Adding all of them in >> an ad-hoc and uncoordinated manner is a bit sledgehammery. >> >> The Java community uses zookeeper a lot >> The container orchestration community seem to all love etcd >> I hear tell that there a bunch of ops people who are in love with consul >> >> I'd suggest we look at more than lock management. >> > > Oh I very much agree, but gotta start somewhere :) > > > >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >> Unsubscribe: >> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
