There are at least 3 areas Li plugin performs better than He plugin: - Flow bulk operations - Statistics collection - OF messages ordering
For these reasons I think it is good to move to Li plugin but not before we fix some of the stability and cluster issues it has. BR/Luis > On Feb 19, 2016, at 5:16 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ashutosh, > > About your question: > > >> Is it possible to validate Li-plugin (performs equal-to-or-better than > >> He-plugin) before asking the projects to migrate? > > There were comparisons sent out earlier showing the performance was better or > equal than the Helium design in most areas. > > Thanks, > Abhijit > > > On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 3:51 AM, Ashutosh Bisht <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Hi Abhijit > > We had tested Li-plugin earlier.. We also ran into stability issues > > Bug 4925 <https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4925> - [Clustering]: > Openflow connections unstable with Lithium plugin. > > > > We limited our testing on Li-plugin since it was decided to use He-plugin for > Be release. > > Is it possible to validate Li-plugin (performs equal-to-or-better than > He-plugin) before asking the projects to migrate? > > > > With regards > > Ashutosh > > > > From: [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > [mailto:[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>] On Behalf Of Luis > Gomez > Sent: Friday, February 19, 2016 1:15 PM > To: Abhijit Kumbhare > Cc: [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [openflowplugin-dev] OFP-Li and OFP-He in Beryllium SRs > > > > Personally I think it is less risky changing master and if that works, cherry > pick change to stable/beryllium. > > > > BR/Luis > > > > > > On Feb 18, 2016, at 6:48 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > Yes - agree. But the work to add the support for the Lithium design can start > from the projects side in parallel. We should also explore creative ways to > see how we can make this easier on the projects: > > > > Since Beryllium has just been released & now the development of most projects > will shift to the master branch may be we should change the default features > to be Li version in stable/beryllium and ask projects to see what breaks? > Does that make sense? > > > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Luis Gomez <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hi ofp devs, > > > > I agree with the plan to move projects to Li design, however I think before > asking projects to effectively move we have to address few issues here: > > > > 1) OF1.0 issue: > > > > https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/releng/view/openflowplugin/job/openflowplugin-csit-1node-flow-services-lithium-redesign-only-beryllium/ > > <https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/releng/view/openflowplugin/job/openflowplugin-csit-1node-flow-services-lithium-redesign-only-beryllium/> > https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5328 > <https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5328> > > > 2) Cluster issues: > > > > https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/releng/view/openflowplugin/job/openflowplugin-csit-3node-clustering-only-beryllium/ > > <https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/releng/view/openflowplugin/job/openflowplugin-csit-3node-clustering-only-beryllium/> > https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5388 > <https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5388> > > > 3) Stability issues: > > > > https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/releng/view/openflowplugin/job/openflowplugin-csit-1node-periodic-longevity-lithium-redesign-only-beryllium/ > > <https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/releng/view/openflowplugin/job/openflowplugin-csit-1node-periodic-longevity-lithium-redesign-only-beryllium/> > https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5271 > <https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5271> > > > BR/Luis > > > > > > On Feb 18, 2016, at 12:42 PM, Abhijit Kumbhare <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > Hideyuki, > > > > Thanks for bringing this topic up! I was planning to initiate a conversation > on this later today - since the Beryllium release was officially approved > today. First of all - I think we should dedicate a TWS session for this topic > regarding the following discussion and feedback: > > > > 1. OpenFlow plugin project voted to do the following: > > OF Plugin recommends dependent ODL projects to all move to Li plugin design > in the Be SR 1 timeframe > (https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/openflowplugin-dev/2016-February/004607.html > > <https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/openflowplugin-dev/2016-February/004607.html> > ) > > 2. What do projects see as issues & impediments to move to the Lithium design > in the SRs (target SR 1) and how the OpenFlow plugin project can address > them? Example of the issues - your request regarding the stats RPCs. > > 3. Develop a timeframe for completing this migration based on the > issues/impediments. > > I would like to note that the key requirement from OpenFlow plugin > perspective is that the Boron development should not be done on two different > designs. The timeframe should be based on this requirement. Hence OFP thinks > it will be important to do this change in the SR1 (or SR2 if cannot be > managed). This way OFP developers can concentrate on the Lithium design > during the Boron release timeframe (other than occasional high priority bug > fixes on Helium design in the subsequent SRs). However, we (OFP & dependent > projects) will need to work together for this timeframe. > > > > I will try to get this topic on the TWS call on Monday (assuming we can get > the following folks from OFP on Monday (alphabetical order) - Anil Vishnoi, > Jozef Bazigal, Kamal Rameshan, Michal Rehak & hopefully Muthu/Shuva & Luis. > > > > I think the above answers all of your questions except one: > > Do you plan to continuously support the OFP-He of Beryllium until > OpenDaylight project stops to support Beryllium? > > The answer to that is - yes. OpenFlow Plugin has to support OFP-He in > Beryllium - as per ODL release / deprecation requirements. > > > > Thanks, > > Abhijit > > > > On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 11:43 AM, Tai, Hideyuki <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Hi OpenFlow Plugin project, > > Could you share your plan about the migration to the OFP-Li in Beryllium SRs? > Should all projects migrate to the OFP-Li by Beryllium SR1? > Do you plan to continuously support the OFP-He of Beryllium until > OpenDaylight project stops to support Beryllium? > (In my understanding, OpenDaylight project officially stops to support > Beryllium (4th) after it releases Carbon (6th).) > > If we need to migrate to the OFP-Li by Beryllium SR1, I would like to start > to test VTN project's features with the OFP-Li as soon as possible. > Though, to migrate the VTN features from OFP-He to OFP-Li, we need the > "get-stats-.." RPC by default in the OFP-Li as I explained in the following > mail. > https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/vtn-dev/2016-February/001278.html > <https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/vtn-dev/2016-February/001278.html> > > Regards, > Hideyuki Tai > > > > > _______________________________________________ > openflowplugin-dev mailing list > [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev > <https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev> > > > _______________________________________________ > openflowplugin-dev mailing list > [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev > <https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev> > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ openflowplugin-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev
