-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Mmmm... I don't think it's that clear (re: an application issue). I
mean, yes - the application is doing the os.fork() at the 'wrong'
time, but where is this made clear in the oslo.messaging API
documentation?
I think this is the real issue here: what is the "official" guidance
for using os.fork() and its interaction with oslo libraries?
In the case of oslo.messaging, I can't find any mention of os.fork()
in the API docs (I may have missed it - please correct me if so).
That would imply - at least to me - that there is _no_ restrictions of
using os.fork() together with oslo.messaging.
Yes, I agree we should add a note on that in oslo.messaging (and perhaps
in oslo.db too).
And also the os.fork() is done by the service.ProcessLauncher of
oslo-incubator,
and it's not (yet) documented. But once oslo.service library will be
released, it will.
But in the case of qpid, that is definitely _not_ the case.
The legacy qpid driver - impl_qpid - imports a 3rd party library, the
qpid.messaging API. This library uses threading.Thread internally,
we (consumers of this library) have no control over how that thread is
managed. So for impl_qpid, os.fork()'ing after the driver is loaded
can't be guaranteed to work. In fact, I'd say os.fork() and
impl_qpid will not work - full stop.
Yes, I have tried it, and I have catch what happen and I can confirm
that too now, unfortunately :( And this can occurs with any driver if
the 3rd party library
doesn't work when we use os.fork()
For the amqp1 driver case, I think this is the same things, it seems
to do lazy creation of the connection too.
We have more flexibility here, since the driver directly controls when
the thread is spawned. But the very fact that the thread is used
places a restriction on how oslo.messaging and os.fork() can be used
together, which isn't made clear in the documentation for the library.
I'm not familiar with the rabbit driver - I've seen some patch for
heatbeating in rabbit introduce threading, so there may also be an
implication there as well.
Yes, we need to check that.
Personally, I don't like this API, because the behavior difference
between
'__init__' and 'start' is too implicit.
That's true, but I'd say that the problem of implicitness re:
os.fork() needs to be clarified at the library level as well.
I agree.
I will write the documentation patch for oslo.messaging.
Cheers,
- ---
Mehdi Abaakouk
mail: sil...@sileht.net
irc: sileht
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: OpenPGP.js v.1.20131017
Comment: http://openpgpjs.org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=G9oX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
