t;Matthieu Simonin" <matthieu.simo...@inria.fr>
> > À: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
> openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
> > Envoyé: Jeudi 6 Juillet 2017 16:31:46
> > Objet: Re: [openstack-dev] [FEMDC][Massively
ns)"
> > <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
> > Envoyé: Mercredi 5 Juillet 2017 21:48:29
> > Objet: Re: [openstack-dev] [FEMDC][MassivelyDistributed] Strawman proposal
> > for message bus analysis
> >
> > Thank you Matt,
> >
> > This is ver
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
> Date: Saturday, July 1, 2017 at 4:42 AM
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
4:42 AM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [FEMDC][MassivelyDistributed] Strawman proposal
for message bus analysis
Hi Paul-André,
This was without ceilometer. Nova + Neutro
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
> Envoyé: Vendredi 30 Juin 2017 18:42:04
> Objet: Re: [openstack-dev] [FEMDC][MassivelyDistributed] Strawman proposal
> for message bus analysis
>
> Hi Matthieu,
>
> You mentioned 15000 connections with 1000 compute
e questions)"
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Date: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 at 6:54 PM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
<openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [FEMDC][MassivelyDistributed] Strawman
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Ilya Shakhat wrote:
> Hi Ken,
>
> Please check scenarios and reports that exist in Performance Docs. In
> particular you may be interested in:
> * O.M.Simulator - https://github.com/openstack/o
> slo.messaging/blob/master/tools/simulator.py
>
estions)"
> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
> Envoyé: Mercredi 21 Juin 2017 15:23:26
> Objet: [openstack-dev] [FEMDC][MassivelyDistributed] Strawman proposal for
> message bus analysis
>
> Hi All,
>
> Andy and I have taken a stab at defining some test scenarios
On 06/21/2017 11:31 AM, Ken Giusti wrote:
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Jay Pipes > wrote:
On 06/21/2017 09:23 AM, Ken Giusti wrote:
Andy and I have taken a stab at defining some test scenarios for
anal the different
On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Jay Pipes wrote:
> On 06/21/2017 09:23 AM, Ken Giusti wrote:
>
>> Andy and I have taken a stab at defining some test scenarios for anal the
>> different message bus...
>>
>
> That was a particularly unfortunatey choice of words.
>
>
Ugh.
On 06/21/2017 09:23 AM, Ken Giusti wrote:
Andy and I have taken a stab at defining some test scenarios for anal
the different message bus...
That was a particularly unfortunate choice of words.
Best,
-jay
__
OpenStack
On 06/21/2017 09:23 AM, Ken Giusti wrote:
Andy and I have taken a stab at defining some test scenarios for anal
the different message bus...
That was a particularly unfortunatey choice of words.
Best,
-jay
__
OpenStack
Hi Ken,
Please check scenarios and reports that exist in Performance Docs. In
particular you may be interested in:
* O.M.Simulator -
https://github.com/openstack/oslo.messaging/blob/master/tools/simulator.py
* MQ performance scenario -
Hi All,
Andy and I have taken a stab at defining some test scenarios for anal the
different message bus technologies:
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/1BGhFHDIoi
We've started with tests for just the oslo.messaging layer to analyze
throughput and latency as the number of message bus clients -
14 matches
Mail list logo