My understanding is same as from Ihar, and we no longer have the degradation
in the latest Icehouse update. There was a degradation in 2014.1.2 [2]
but the fix
was backported in 2014.1.3 [1].
We don't need to take care of backporting when considering metadata RPC patch.

[1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/120418/
[2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/95491/

Thanks,
Akihiro


On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Ihar Hrachyshka <ihrac...@redhat.com> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
>
> On 22/10/14 02:26, Maru Newby wrote:
>> We merged caching support for the metadata agent in juno, and
>> backported to icehouse.  It was enabled by default in juno, but
>> disabled by default in icehouse to satisfy the stable maint
>> requirement of not changing functional behavior.
>>
>> While performance of the agent was improved with caching enabled,
>> it regressed a reported 8x when caching was disabled [1].  This
>> means that by default, the caching backport severely impacts
>> icehouse Neutron's performance.
>
> If I correctly follow the degradation scenario, it's caused by
> unneeded tokens requested from keystone each time a request hits
> neutron metadata agent. This should be already fixed as [1] (included
> in the latest 2014.1.3 release).
>
> [1]: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/118996/
>
>>
>> So, what is the way forward?  We definitely need to document the
>> problem for both icehouse and juno.  Is documentation enough?  Or
>> can we enable caching by default in icehouse?  Or remove the
>> backport entirely.
>
> If I'm correct, the issue is already solved in the latest Icehouse
> release, so there seems to be no need to document the regression for
> 2014.1.2. But yeah, sure we could put it in its release notes just in
> case.
>
>>
>> There is also a proposal to replace the metadata agent’s use of the
>> neutron client in favor of rpc [2].  There were comments on an old
>> bug suggesting we didn’t want to do this [3], but assuming that we
>> want this change in Kilo, is backporting even a possibility given
>> that it implies a behavioral change to be useful?
>
> We probably wouldn't consider backporting it to stable branches
> because it touches RPC API, and we usually avoid it there. Anyway, it
> shouldn't be an issue at all (as per my comment above).
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>> Maru
>>
>>
>>
>> 1: https://bugs.launchpad.net/cloud-archive/+bug/1361357 2:
>> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/121782 3:
>> https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1092043
>>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.22 (Darwin)
>
> iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJUR4XAAAoJEC5aWaUY1u57rYAH/jDqluduRLxwgHykP/NMIesj
> 0MnesaiFwfeHdE5z3YEnteVkxEtkDRnmTRaau9TuOJpVrUfSIA7Lpa3S79Rv4cT5
> CC82FlU32fbOkCVFiXqgQvadNc3wrqHMag9FD6fpbg/MZlvV/VWHMl/z55rwhNh/
> yL+CzXd9uNgZy+ng0LI1EY+u9UcLtVwF8xhLhRIu5NMRim3HeRFlFUSN41ccemRJ
> TdJUxMdtlYls/nCuIUk2QpSOZt1Hk2bysrBPh0etV501vsSHCq3cYZ3vjmt+jNX9
> thTKlsOaFpSLWnTn5+ERXk3y7pvJxo1AGOli3sLXIDYYNYPK4Y8PRYPLm43U45o=
> =o7SU
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev



-- 
Akihiro Motoki <amot...@gmail.com>

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to