On Apr 28, 2016, at 5:35 PM, Clint Byrum <cl...@fewbar.com> wrote: > - Vitess [2] is a proven technology that serves _every_ request to > Youtube, and provides a familiar SQL interface with sharding built > in. Shard by project ID and you can just use regular index semantics. > Or if that's unacceptable (IMO it's fine since Vitess provides enough > redundancy that one shard has plenty of failure-domain reliability), > you can also use the built-in Hadoop support they have for doing > exactly what has been described (merge sorting the result of cross-cell > queries).
Thanks for that reference. I hadn’t heard of Vitess before, but it looks pretty capable. > So, I have to ask, why is cells v2 being pushed so hard without looking > outside OpenStack for actual existing solutions, which, IMO, are > _numerous_, battle hardened, and simpler than cells. Cells are a great concept, but of course the devil is in the implementation. So if having cells is an advantage (and that is a separate discussion that already seems settled), then we should focus on the best way to implement it for (short-term) efficiency and (long-term) maintainability. -- Ed Leafe __________________________________________________________________________ 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
