Default behavior an small API change as far as I remember, that is why we decide to do it in master only.
> On May 11, 2016, at 12:50 AM, Jozef Bacigal -X (jbacigal - PANTHEON > TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes we have fix on master, but I think we all agreed put this fix only on > master because it change the default behavior. > > Jozef > > From: Abhijit Kumbhare [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 11. mája 2016 8:33 > To: Jozef Bacigal -X (jbacigal - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) > <[email protected]> > Cc: Anil Vishnoi <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Abhijit > Kumbhare <[email protected]>; Subhash Singh > <[email protected]>; Luis Gomez Palacios > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [openflowplugin-dev] table features > > The next SR is July end - and I believe you will have the actual fix in the > master & not a workaround - right? If that is the case - then can that be > ported to stable/beryllium before the next SR? > > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 11:01 PM, Jozef Bacigal -X (jbacigal - PANTHEON > TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Abhijit hard to decide but if we declare some performance in SR2 we should if > possible put it in this release. And the pull from master you mean the actual > fix yang model structure change not this "workaround" ? > > > > Jozef > > From: Abhijit Kumbhare <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 5:32 PM > To: Jozef Bacigal -X (jbacigal - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) > Cc: Anil Vishnoi; [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; > Abhijit Kumbhare; Subhash Singh; Luis Gomez Palacios; > [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: [openflowplugin-dev] table features > > Jozef, > > On a second glance - the patch is not merged. So we will not need to add it > to the SR2 release notes (the build done on Friday). So can you please update > your patch to have the following description so we will not forget when it is > time to actually release note? > > Added the ability to configure whether to pull table features for the Li > design and changed the default to skip pulling table features for the feature. > Data yang model defines a table features inside of table grouping. OVS 2.4 > finally supports table features. Now large table features data are stored > inside of each table. It means 254 table features are stored in DS. This > ability allows skip pulling and storing of large table features. Table > features are still available via rpc but if set to true then maintenance in > DS will be omitted and DS latency for inventory will be the same as by OVS > >=2.3. > > Secondly - if the table features performance fix is already available & since > the next SR is a few months away - do you think it would be better to just > pull the actual fix from master once we know there are no side effects? > > Thanks, > Abhijit > > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 7:22 AM, Abhijit Kumbhare <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Thanks Jozef! Good explanation - I will work with An later today to get it > into the release notes. > > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 4:05 AM, Jozef Bacigal -X (jbacigal - PANTHEON > TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Data yang model defines a table features inside of table grouping. OVS 2.4 > finally supports table features. Now large table features data are stored > inside of each table. It means 254 table features are stored in DS. This > ability allow skip pulling and storing of large table features. Table > features are still available via rpc but if set to true then maintenance in > DS will be omitted and DS latency for inventory will be the same as by OVS > >=2.3. > > > > From: Anil Vishnoi <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 9:44 AM > > To: Abhijit Kumbhare > Cc: Jozef Bacigal -X (jbacigal - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco); > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; Abhijit Kumbhare; > Subhash Singh; [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>; Luis Gomez Palacios > Subject: Re: [openflowplugin-dev] table features > > > > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 12:30 AM, Abhijit Kumbhare <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > This change was due to the major performance hit on OVS 2.4 - and I believe > was a decision at one of the meetings. Reason: the inefficient table features > fetch were always causing a significant performance drop regardless of > whether DIDM or any other features needing table features were enabled or > not. If I remember right - the decision was to turn off the table features on > stable/beryllium & add the riskier fix on the master first & then maybe port > it to the stable/beryllium after some time it has been baked in (may be in > the next SR). > > So it would be better to release note it I think. > Yes, so lets do it. > > > Do you have a short 3-4 line description Jozef for release note (explaining > why it was changed)? > > On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 12:22 AM, Anil Vishnoi <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Personally i want it to be disabled by default, but if i look at it from user > perspective, we are changing the behaviour between two SR version and it > might be of some concern. But if this change is for lithium plugin, i think > the impact is minimal, so i think if we can release note it, that would be > better. > > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 11:32 PM, Jozef Bacigal -X (jbacigal - PANTHEON > TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > You propose to leave the flag (skip table features) false ? Just not to > change default behavior? > > > > Jozef > > From: Anil Vishnoi <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Sent: Monday, May 9, 2016 7:21 PM > To: Jozef Bacigal -X (jbacigal - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) > Cc: Abhijit Kumbhare; [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; > Abhijit Kumbhare; Subhash Singh; [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>; Luis Gomez Palacios > > Subject: Re: [openflowplugin-dev] table features > > okay, although it's been done for li plugin, but i think it will change the > default behavior between two SR (SR2 and SR-3). > > On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 1:48 AM, Jozef Bacigal -X (jbacigal - PANTHEON > TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Nope, in stable/beryllium we add just this on/off flag, with default setting > on OFF table features. > > > > https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/36506/3 > <https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/36506/3> > > > Jozef > > From: Anil Vishnoi <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Sent: Monday, May 9, 2016 10:37 AM > To: Abhijit Kumbhare > Cc: Jozef Bacigal -X (jbacigal - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco); > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; Abhijit Kumbhare; > Subhash Singh; [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>; Luis Gomez Palacios > > Subject: Re: [openflowplugin-dev] table features > > was this patch merged to stable/beryllium as well? > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Abhijit Kumbhare <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > OK. > > On Tue, Apr 26, 2016 at 12:18 AM, Jozef Bacigal -X (jbacigal - PANTHEON > TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Hi Abhijit, > > > > I thought I get an answer from NIC and DIDM guys, but in this case, I would > propose we just make the on/off flag in beryllium SR3 and this solution we > merge only into master M3 as we agreed with Luiz. > > > > Jozef > > From: Abhijit Kumbhare <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 9:20 PM > To: Subhash Singh > Cc: Jozef Bacigal -X (jbacigal - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco); Abhijit > Kumbhare;[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; > [email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [openflowplugin-dev] table features > > Hi Jozef, > > Will you be putting https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/36559 > <https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/36559> into stable/beryllium after > sometime has passed or do you think its better to avoid it altogether in > stable/beryllium? > > Thanks, > Abhijit > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 5:33 AM, Subhash Singh > <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > +[Anandhi] > > -- > Regards, > Subhash Kumar Singh > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Jozef Bacigal -X (jbacigal - PANTHEON > TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco) <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > Hi everyone, mainly guys from NIC and DIDM, > > I would ask you if you can read and talk about the bug 5464 table features > > https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5464 > <https://bugs.opendaylight.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5464> > > There are two proposals, first (berylium SR2) that we merge the skip flag, > which is I would say some "workaround" and set the flag to TRUE so we default > skip the table features > https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/36506/ > <https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/36506/> > and second (boron M3) this solution of the problem which would lead to > changes into your projects > > https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/36559 > <https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/c/36559> > > We would much appreciate you answers > > Jozef > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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> > > > > -- > Thanks > Anil > > > > -- > Thanks > Anil > > > > -- > Thanks > Anil > > > > > -- > Thanks > Anil
_______________________________________________ openflowplugin-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/openflowplugin-dev
