Monty Taylor wrote:
On 04/22/2016 03:27 PM, Ed Leafe wrote:
OK, so I know that Friday afternoons are usually the worst times to
write a blog post and start an email discussion, and that the Friday
immediately before a Summit is the absolute worst, but I did it anyway.
http://blog.leafe.com/index.php/2016/04/22/distributed_data_nova/
Whee!! Well look - at least someone is still on email. Lucky you.
Summary: we are creating way too much complexity by trying to make Nova
handle things that are best handled by a distributed database. The
recent split of the Nova DB into an API database and separate cell
databases is the glaring example of going down the wrong road.
Anyway, read it on your flight (or, in my case, drive) to Austin, and
feel free to pull me aside to explain just how wrong I am. ;-)
So - I don't think you're wrong, but I don't think you're right either.
I think replacing nova's persistent storage layer with a distributed
database would have a great effect - but I do not think it would have
anything to do with the database itself. It would come from the act that
would be completely necessary to accomplish that- completely rewriting
the persistence layer.
So... The folks from the Discovery initiative working on a
massively-distributed cloud use case have been working on incremental
changes to make that use case better supported by stock OpenStack. That
includes an oslo.db driver backed by a distributed database. Being
scientists, they ran interesting experiments to see when and where it
made sense.
They will present their findings in the upstream dev track, and I think
it makes a good data point for this discussion:
https://www.openstack.org/summit/austin-2016/summit-schedule/events/7342
--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)
__________________________________________________________________________
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
