On Thu, 2013-12-12 at 21:01 +0000, Joshua Harlow wrote: > Maybe time to revive something like: > > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/12759/ > > > From experience, all sites (and those internal to yahoo) provide a /status > (or equivalent) that is used for all sorts of things (from basic > load-balancing up/down) to other things like actually introspecting the > state of the process (or to get basics about what the process is doing). > Typically this is not exposed to the public (its why > http://www.yahoo.com/status works for me but not for u). It seems like > something like that could help (but of course not completely solve) the > type of response jay mentioned.
>From reading through the review above, it looks like markmc had two main objections: a) The status/healthcheck middleware should not be in Oslo unless all OpenStack projects have an interest in using it b) Standardizing on a HEAD request to the root resource seemed like a better idea Mark, has any of your thinking changed on the above? Regarding using HEAD, that limits the returned result to HTTP headers, versus perhaps returning a list of dependent services that this service is waiting on in order to move into a "healthy" status. Personally, I believe OpenStack has moved into a phase where having this kind of standardized status/healthcheck middleware would be very useful. Best, -jay _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
