-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Bjorn Tillenius wrote: > Just to clarify. The reason I'm asking these question is that we should > think carefully before adding another moving part.
This was presented as a fait accompli at the Epic. It seems quite late to be questioning it. > Foundations team has > to do the initial setup, which requires time from LOSAs. Then the Code > team has to take what Foundations did and integrate it with their work. AIUI - RabbitMQ is slated to be deployed across the whole of Canonical, not just Landscape and Launchpad. - The incremental costs of supporting it in Launchpad are much lower than the initial cost of implementing it, which has already been paid by Landscape. > I'm a strong believer in kiko's rule of software engineering: It will > never work the first time. So this means even more work for Foundations, > Code, and LOSAs. Will all these teams have time to take on this kind of > work, given their current priorities? > > Also, this adds another thing for the LOSAs to run and maintain. AIUI, this is not something additional. It has already been deployed for Landscape. > What > happens if there's something wrong with the RabbitMQ server (software or > hardware). For Jobs, as long as we also continue to poll, a RabbitMQ failure would reduce service to its current levels, not cause an all-out failure. > Do we run multiple servers to avoid Launchpad stop working if > one server fails? I think that's a a question for IS. Aaron -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkrOWpUACgkQ0F+nu1YWqI0azgCfehTCaervwy3OXwsahk/HzKSo lZkAn18+6oMJtjPYqMMdwzOzSEt9geUy =YcS3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
