I agree. Configuration with memcache made by Fuel now has issues which badly affect overall OpenStack experience.
On Monday 27 July 2015 14:34:59 Vladimir Kuklin wrote: > Folks > > We saw several High issues with how keystone manages regular memcached > tokens. I know, this is not the perfect time as you already decided to push > it from 7.0, but I would reconsider declaring it as FFE as it affects HA > and UX poorly. If we can enable tokens simply by altering configuration, > let's do it. I see commit for this feature is pretty trivial. > > On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 9:27 AM, Mike Scherbakov <mscherba...@mirantis.com> > > wrote: > > Fuel Library team, I expect your immediate reply here. > > > > I'd like upgrades team to take a look at this one, as well as at the one > > which moves Keystone under Apache, in order to check that there are no > > issues here. > > > > -1 from me for this time in the cycle. I'm concerned about: > > 1. I don't see any reference to blueprint or bug which explains (with > > measurements) why we need this change in reference architecture, and > > what > > are the thoughts about it in puppet-openstack, and OpenStack Keystone. > > We > > need to get datapoints, and point to them. Just knowing that Keystone > > team > > implemented support for it doesn't yet mean that we need to rush in > > enabling this. > > 2. It is quite noticeable change, not a simple enhancement. I reviewed > > the patch, there are questions raised. > > 3. It doesn't pass CI, and I don't have information on risks > > associated, and additional effort required to get this done (how long > > would > > it take to get it done) > > 4. This feature increases complexity of reference architecture. Now > > I'd like every complexity increase to be optional. I have feedback from > > the > > field, that our prescriptive architecture just doesn't fit users' > > needs, > > and it is so painful to decouple then what is needed vs what is not. > > Let's > > start extending stuff with an easy switch, being propagated from Fuel > > Settings. Is it possible to do? How complex would it be? > > > > If we get answers for all of this, and decide that we still want the > > feature, then it would be great to have it. I just don't feel that it's > > right timing anymore - we entered FF. > > > > Thanks, > > > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:53 AM Alexander Makarov <amaka...@mirantis.com> > > > > wrote: > >> Colleagues, > >> > >> I would like to request an exception from the Feature Freeze for Fernet > >> tokens support added to the fuel-library in the following CR: > >> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/201029/ > >> > >> Keystone part of the feature is implemented in the upstream and the > >> change impacts setup configuration only. > >> > >> Please, respond if you have any questions or concerns related to this > >> request. > >> > >> Thanks in advance. > >> > >> -- > >> Kind Regards, > >> Alexander Makarov, > >> Senior Software Developer, > >> > >> Mirantis, Inc. > >> 35b/3, Vorontsovskaya St., 109147, Moscow, Russia > >> > >> Tel.: +7 (495) 640-49-04 > >> Tel.: +7 (926) 204-50-60 > >> > >> Skype: MAKAPOB.AJIEKCAHDP > >> > >> _________________________________________________________________________ > >> _ > >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > >> Unsubscribe: > >> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > -- > > Mike Scherbakov > > #mihgen > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev -- Best regards, Boris Bobrov __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev