On 03/02/14 12:44 -0500, Jay Pipes wrote:
On Mon, 2014-02-03 at 17:04 +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote:On 03/02/14 10:13 -0500, Jay Pipes wrote: >On Mon, 2014-02-03 at 10:03 +0100, Flavio Percoco wrote: >> IMHO, the bit that should really be optimized is the selection of the >> store nodes where the image should be downloaded from. That is, >> selecting the nearest location from the image locations and this is >> something that perhaps should happen in glance-api, not nova. > >I disagree. The reason is because glance-api does not know where nova >is. Nova does.Nova doesn't know where glance is either. More info is required in order to finally do something smart here. Not sure what the best approach is just yet but as mentioned in my previous email I think focusing on the stores for now is the thing to do. (As you pointed out bellow too).Right, which is why I am recommending to get rid of glance-api below...>I continue to think that the best performance gains will come from >getting rid of glance-api entirely, putting the block-streaming bits >into a separate Python library, and having Nova and Cinder pull >image/volume bits directly from backend storage instead of going through >the glance middleman. This is exactly what we're doing by pulling glance.store into its own library. I'm working on this myself. We are not completely getting rid of glance-api but we're working on not depending on it to get the image data.Cool. Have you pushed a patch for this I can see?
Not to gerrit but I'm hacking on this in my own GH repo first. I'll be submitting that patch soon, hopefully. This is the blueprint[0] for the glance.store work, there you'll find the link to my GH repo! :) [0] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/+spec/create-store-package
Thanks, Flavio!
Cheers :) Flavio -- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco
pgpH6ZodmlvDT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
