So the consensus seems to be to defer (or not ever) getting rid of async
for blobstore, except what's needed to be able to support de-asynced
Rackspace etc compute stuff.

Any counteropinions?

(Oh, also, again barring any arguments against this, I'm gonna skip
de-asyncing anything in labs - the AWS/Google stuff is de-asynced already,
the OpenStack stuff I leave to the Rackers, Abiquo and a couple others are
already de-asynced, and I couldn't give a crap about the rest!)

A.


On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Andrew Bayer <[email protected]>wrote:

> I'd guess the same thing may be the case for Nova/Swift/Keystone, but
> don't quote me on that.
>
> A.
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Everett Toews <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> TL;DR I've come to the same conclusion. BlobStore is the lynch pin right
>> now.
>>
>> Here's what I've found. Improvements to the logic below is welcome.
>>
>> To unasync cloudservers we need to unasync openstack-common.
>> If we unasync openstack-common, we need to unasync cloudfiles.
>> If we unasync cloudfiles, we need to unasync BlobStore.
>>
>> If we can unasync cloudfiles, we can unasync openstack-keystone.
>> (cloudfiles depends on both openstack-common and openstack-keystone)
>> If we can unasync openstack-keystone, we can unasync the rest of the
>> rackspace apis.
>>
>> If that's correct, unasyncing the BlobStore should unblock us for the
>> rest of the unasync.
>>
>> Everett
>>
>> On Aug 22, 2013, at 1:19 PM, Andrew Gaul wrote:
>>
>> > I will look at this over the weekend.  Note that Blobstore has more
>> > interesting uses of async due to clear container, multi-part upload, and
>> > others.  Can we use some fake sameThreadExecutor shims to work around
>> > keystone async in the short-term?
>> >
>> > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 01:43:05PM -0400, Andrew Bayer wrote:
>> >> I think all I need is someone who knows blobstore to get the blobstore
>> >> abstraction able to support not having async - I can probably go nuts
>> for a
>> >> few days and get all the blobstore implementations de-asynced once the
>> >> abstraction is ready.
>> >>
>> >> A.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Andrew Gaul <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 09:40:06PM -0400, Andrew Bayer wrote:
>> >>>> So most of the compute providers/APIs in core are now async-free on
>> >>> master
>> >>>> - the only exceptions I can think of off the top of my head are the
>> >>> vcloud
>> >>>> ones, the old rackspace ones, and the nova ones. The vcloud ones
>> I'll get
>> >>>> around to sometime in the next couple weeks - that's just a matter of
>> >>>> gutting them out. But the rackspace/nova ones are a lot hairier.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> When I tried de-asyncing the cloudservers API, I found I had to
>> de-async
>> >>>> the keystone v1 API as well - and that can't actually go live until
>> >>>> cloudfiles is able to de-async too. I haven't verified, but I'm
>> pretty
>> >>> sure
>> >>>> it's the same situation for nova/keystone/swift. And cloudfiles/swift
>> >>> can't
>> >>>> de-async until blobstore itself supports non-async.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> So this brings up an important question. We're about 6 weeks from the
>> >>>> target date for 1.7.0 - can we actually get the blobstore stuff
>> >>> de-asynced
>> >>>> by then? Or are we going to need to push the de-async completion back
>> >>> 'til
>> >>>> 1.7.1/2/3/whatever? How high a priority should this be?
>> >>>
>> >>> I prefer to keep the date for 1.7.0 above all; we have features
>> waiting
>> >>> for this release and we should not delay it.  Also, maintaining 1.6.x
>> >>> will become increasingly difficult as the two branches diverge.
>> >>> Blobstore can remain async in 1.7.0 and we can address this in 1.8.0
>> >>> (1.7.x feels inappropriate).  However, we have so much progress on
>> >>> de-async for compute, let's do the minimum work on cloudfiles/swift to
>> >>> complete compute.  I will step up for some of this, however, I do not
>> >>> understand how this interacts with some of the Swift rewrite work and
>> >>> perhaps someone at Rackspace can explain this and help me out as well?
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> Andrew Gaul
>> >>> http://gaul.org/
>> >>>
>> >
>> > --
>> > Andrew Gaul
>> > http://gaul.org/
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to