On 01/02/2014 06:41 AM, Radomir Dopieralski wrote:
On 20/12/13 17:34, Clint Byrum wrote:
OpenStack is non-deterministic. Deterministic systems are rigid and unable
to handle failure modes of any kind of diversity.
I wonder how you are going to debug a non-deterministic system :-)
Very carefully.
We tend to err toward
pushing problems back to the user and giving them tools to resolve the
problem. Avoiding spurious problems is important too, no doubt. However,
what Jay has been suggesting is that the situation a pessimistic locking
system would avoid is entirely user created, and thus lower priority
than say, actually having a complete UI for deploying OpenStack.
I fail to see how leaving ourselves the ability to add locks when they
become needed, by keeping tuskar-api in place, conflicts with actually
having a complete UI for deploying OpenStack. Can you elaborate on that?
I think all Clint was saying is that completing the UI for base
OpenStack deployment (Tuskar UI) is a higher priority than trying to add
a pessimistic lock model/concurrency to any particular part of the
existing UI.
That doesn't mean you can't work on a pessimistic locking model. It just
means that Clint (and I) think that completing the as-yet-finished UI
work is a more important task.
Best, and Happy New Year!
-jay
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
