On 2013-07-26 12:38, Russell Bryant wrote:
On 07/26/2013 11:53 AM, Ben Nemec wrote:
On 2013-07-26 10:39, Jay Pipes wrote:
On 07/26/2013 08:04 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
On 07/25/2013 08:30 PM, Joshua Harlow wrote:
When you have so much state to maintain then aren't the APIs
incorrect??
Yes, the EC2 APIs are incorrect in being silly and using ints for
ids
for so many things, also for supporting people to make GET requests
with
16k get strings. But there isn't much we can do about that. :)
Or can there be new API's that expose this translation, something
seems/feels wrong if there is so much state to maintain u can't do
a
translation layer.
Most of this is about id allocation and translation. OpenStack uses
UUIDs, AWS uses ints. UUIDs is a better design point, and means you
don't need to have a global auto allocator which you can guaruntee,
which is good.
Also there are EC2 design points that have request lengths greater
than
what Apache (or any other web front end) is compiled to support, as
they
have the possibility of enourmous GET strings (16K at least). Again,
instead of sensibly requiring to move to POST in those cases. I know
we
had to land a change for CERN to allow bigger requests on EC2 calls
for
just this reason (we did keep the get length apache sized on OSAPI,
so
we didn't break people's attempts to get this behind a real web
server).
Translation is never exact, go talk to the WINE folks about that
one.
I'm personally fine either way, proxy or embedded in openstack.
Which
approach isn't really the issue. It's that no one is doing the work.
Actions speak much louder than words (well... except in pundit echo
chambers), so I'd much rather have people with strong opinions on
this
express how strongly those are by having a big patch queue for me to
review.
Amen that that.
However, I will say that developers write code to scratch an itch --
or some product manager's itch. So the fact that nobody is all that
interested in spending time to code up enhanced EC2 API support in
Nova is, well, quite telling that the demand for such things is less
than what some people think.
I'm not sure this is a safe assumption to make. It's only natural
that
the companies/people who are working on OpenStack would be more
interested in the OS API, but that doesn't mean there aren't AWS users
out there who would like to migrate off but don't have the expertise
to
contribute to OpenStack.
None of which changes the fact that without developer interest nothing
is going to get done, but I still think it's important to keep in mind
that developer interest does not necessarily equal user interest. The
fact that nobody is currently working on it doesn't mean there isn't
an
opportunity here.
If that demand is communicated by customers to vendors contributing to
OpenStack, and it is a higher priority than other things customers are
asking for, it will get worked on. That just hasn't seemed to be the
case based on contribution activity.
Fair enough. Just wanted to make sure we weren't stuck in a developer
echo chamber and it sounds like we aren't, at least to the extent that
it's possible for us to know.
-Ben
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
