Dear Clint, Dear all, 

It is indeed unfortunate that the WG ends.

From our side (Inria folks from the Discovery initiative [1]), we had planned 
to join the effort after the Boston Summit as we are currently addressing two 
points that are/were closely related to the Arch WG (at least from our 
understanding): 
    
* We have been working during this last cycle on the consolidation of the EnOS 
solution [2] (in particular with advice from the performance team). 
EnOS aims to perform OpenStack Performance analyses/profiling.  It is built on 
top of Kolla and integrates Rally and Shaker and more recently  OSProfiler.
We are currently conducting preliminary experiments to draw, in an automatic 
manner, sequence diagrams such as 
https://docs.openstack.org/ops-guide/_images/provision-an-instance.png
We hope it will help our community to understand better the OpenStack 
architecture as well as the interactions between the different services, in 
particular it would help us to follow changes between cycles. 

* We started a discussion regarding the oslo.messaging driver [3]. 
Our goal is, first,  to make a qualitative analysis of AMQP messages (i.e. we 
would like to understand the different AMQP exchanges better) and try to 
identify possible improvements. 
Second, we will do performance analysis of the rabbitMQ under different 
scenarios and, according to gathered results, we will conduct additional 
experiments with alternatives solutions (ZMQ, Qpid, ...)
Please note that this is a preliminary discussion, so we just exchanged between 
a few folks from the Massively Distributed WG. We proposed a session to the 
forum [4] with the goal of opening the discussion more generally to the 
community. 

We are convinced of the relevance of a WG such as the Architecture one, but as 
you probably already know, it is difficult for most of us to join different 
meetings several times per week, and thus rather difficult to gather efforts 
that are done in other WGs. I don't know whether and how we can improve this 
solution but it would make sense. 

In any case,  thanks for giving a first try. 
Ad_rien_ 

[1]: http://beyondtheclouds.github.io
[2]: https://enos.readthedocs.io/en/latest/
[3]: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/oslo_messaging_discussion 
[4]: http://forumtopics.openstack.org/cfp/details/62

----- Mail original -----
> De: "Clint Byrum" <cl...@fewbar.com>
> À: "openstack-dev" <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>
> Envoyé: Jeudi 6 Avril 2017 19:53:17
> Objet: [openstack-dev] [architecture] Arch-WG, we hardly knew ye..
> 
> I'm going to be blunt. I'm folding the Architecture Working Group
> immediately following our meeting today at 2000 UTC. We'll be using
> the
> time to discuss continuity of the base-services proposal, and any
> other
> draw-down necessary. After that our meetings will cease.
> 
> I had high hopes for the arch-wg, with so many joining us to discuss
> things in Atlanta. But ultimately, we remain a very small group with
> very limited resources, and so I don't think it's the best use of our
> time to continue chasing the arch-wg.
> 
> Thanks everyone for your contributions. See you in the trenches.
> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe:
> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to