On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 1:12 PM, Adam Young <ayo...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 05/13/2016 12:52 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: > >> On 05/13/2016 11:38 AM, Eric Larson wrote: >> >>> Monty Taylor writes: >>> >>> On 05/13/2016 08:23 AM, Mehdi Abaakouk wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 02:58:08PM +0200, Julien Danjou wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> What's wrong with pymemcache, that we picked for tooz and are using >>>>>> for 2 years now? >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/pinterest/pymemcache >>>>>> >>>>> Looks like a good alternative. >>>>> >>>> Honestly, nobody should be using pymemcache or python-memcached or >>>> pylibmc for anything caching related in OpenStack. People should be >>>> using oslo.cache - however, if that needs work before it's usable, >>>> people should be using dogpile.cache, which is what oslo.cache uses on >>>> the backend. >>>> >>>> dogpile is pluggable, so it means that the backend used for caching >>>> can be chosen in a much broader manner. As morgan mentions elsewhere, >>>> that means that people who want to use a different memcache library >>>> just need to write a dogpile driver. >>>> >>>> Please don't anybody directly use memcache libraries for caching in >>>> OpenStack. Please. >>>> >>>> Using dogpile doesn't remove the decision of what caching backend is >>> used. Dogpile has support (I think) for all the libraries mentioned here: >>> >>> >>> https://bitbucket.org/zzzeek/dogpile.cache/src/87965ada186f9b3a4eb7ff033a2e31437d5e9bc6/dogpile/cache/backends/memcached.py >>> >>> >>> Oslo cache would need to be the one making decision as to what backend >>> is used if we need to have something consistent. >>> >> I do not understand why oslo.cache would make a backend decision. It's a >> config-driven thing. I could see oslo.cache having a _default_ ... but >> having oslo.cache use dogpile.cache and then remove the ability for a >> deployer to chose which caching backend dogpile uses seems more than >> passing strange to me. >> > > With oslo cache, you say "I want memcache" and Oslo picks the driver. > Standardizes the implementation within OpenStack. > > You can also specify pylibmc or BMemcached, or Redis, or <my cool driver that lives in entry point XXXX> as well when issuing the .configure() to the dogpile.cache region. The default oslo.cache uses is python-memcached, but that could be fixed easily. > > >> With that said, it is important that we understand what projects have >>> specific requirements or have experienced issues, otherwise there is a >>> good chance teams will hit an issue down the line and have to work >>> around it. >>> >> Yup. Totally agree. I certainly don't want to imply that there aren't >> issues with memcache libs nor that they shouldn't be fixed. Merely >> trying to point out that individual projects programming to the >> interface of any of the libs is a thing that should be fixed. >> >> __________________________________________________________________________ >> 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
