OK, fair enough. Can I ask what the impetus for moving from AMQP to REST for all internal APIs is? Seems to me we will be throwing away a lot of functionality for the benefit of cross-WAN REST communication?
-jay On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Paul Voccio <paul.voc...@rackspace.com> wrote: > Jay, > > I understand Justin's concern if we move /network and /images and /volume > to their own endpoints then it would be a change to the customer. I think > this could be solved by putting a proxy in front of each endpoint and > routing back to the appropriate service endpoint. > > I added another image on the wiki page to describe what I'm trying to say. > http://wiki.openstack.org/api_transition > > I think might not be as bad of a transition since the compute worker would > receive a request for a new compute node then it would proxy over to the > admin or public api of the network or volume node to request information. > It would work very similar to how the queues work now. > > pvo > > On 2/17/11 8:33 PM, "Jay Pipes" <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote: > >>Sorry, I don't view the proposed changes from AMQP to REST as being >>"customer facing API changes". Could you explain? These are internal >>interfaces, no? >> >>-jay >> >>On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Justin Santa Barbara >><jus...@fathomdb.com> wrote: >>> An API is for life, not just for Cactus. >>> I agree that stability is important. I don't see how we can claim to >>> deliver 'stability' when the plan is then immediately to destablize >>> everything with a very disruptive change soon after, including customer >>> facing API changes and massive internal re-architecting. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Justin Santa Barbara >>>> <jus...@fathomdb.com> wrote: >>>> > Pulling volumes & images out into separate services (and moving from >>>> > AMQP to >>>> > REST) sounds like a huge breaking change, so if that is indeed the >>>>plan, >>>> > let's do that asap (i.e. Cactus). >>>> >>>> Sorry, I have to disagree with you here, Justin :) The Cactus release >>>> is supposed to be about stability and the only features going into >>>> Cactus should be to achieve API parity of the OpenStack Compute API >>>> with the Rackspace Cloud Servers API. Doing such a huge change like >>>> moving communication from AMQP to HTTP for volume and network would be >>>> a change that would likely undermine the stability of the Cactus >>>> release severely. >>>> >>>> -jay >>> >>> > > > > Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message (including any attached or > embedded documents) is intended for the exclusive and confidential use of the > individual or entity to which this message is addressed, and unless otherwise > expressly indicated, is confidential and privileged information of Rackspace. > Any dissemination, distribution or copying of the enclosed material is > prohibited. > If you receive this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by > e-mail > at ab...@rackspace.com, and delete the original message. > Your cooperation is appreciated. > > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
