On 16 July 2015 at 07:27, Ed Leafe <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jul 15, 2015, at 1:08 PM, Maish Saidel-Keesing <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> * Consider the cost of introducing a brand new technology into the >>> deployer space. If there _is_ a way to get the desired improvement with, >>> say, just MySQL and some clever sharding, then that might be a smaller >>> pill to swallow for deployers. >> +1000 to this part regarding introducing a new technology > > Yes, of course it has been considered. If it were trivial, I would just > propose a blueprint. > > Again, I'd really like to hear ideas on what kind of results would be > convincing enough to make it worthwhile to introduce a new technology.
We spent some summit time discussing just this: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/TechnologyChoices The summary here is IMO: - ops will follow where we lead BUT - we need to take their needs into account - which includes robustness, operability, and so on - things where an alternative implementation exists can be uptake-driven : e.g. we expand the choices, and observe what folk move onto. That said, I think the fundamental thing today is that we have a bug and its not fixed. LOTS of them. Where fixing them needs better plumbing, lets be bold - but not hasty. -Rob -- Robert Collins <[email protected]> Distinguished Technologist HP Converged Cloud __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
