Hi,
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 11:34 PM, Peter Lemenkov <lemen...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello All! > > Well, side-effects (or any other effects) are quite obvious and > predictable - this will decrease availability of RPC queues a bit. > That's for sure. > Imagine the case when user creates VM instance, and some nova messages are lost. I am not sure we want half-created instances. Who is going to clean up them? Since we do not have results of destructive tests, I vote -2 for FFE for this feature. > > However, Dmitry's guess is that the overall messaging backplane > stability increase (RabitMQ won't fail too often in some cases) would > compensate for this change. This issue is very much real - speaking of > me I've seen an awful cluster's performance degradation when a failing > RabbitMQ node was killed by some watchdog application (or even worse > wasn't killed at all). One of these issues was quite recently, and I'd > love to see them less frequently. > > That said I'm uncertain about the stability impact of this change, yet > I see a reasoning worth discussing behind it. > > 2015-12-01 20:53 GMT+01:00 Sergii Golovatiuk <sgolovat...@mirantis.com>: > > Hi, > > > > -1 for FFE for disabling HA for RPC queue as we do not know all side > effects > > in HA scenarios. > > > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 7:34 PM, Dmitry Mescheryakov > > <dmescherya...@mirantis.com> wrote: > >> > >> Folks, > >> > >> I would like to request feature freeze exception for disabling HA for > RPC > >> queues in RabbitMQ [1]. > >> > >> As I already wrote in another thread [2], I've conducted tests which > >> clearly show benefit we will get from that change. The change itself is > a > >> very small patch [3]. The only thing which I want to do before > proposing to > >> merge this change is to conduct destructive tests against it in order to > >> make sure that we do not have a regression here. That should take just > >> several days, so if there will be no other objections, we will be able > to > >> merge the change in a week or two timeframe. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Dmitry > >> > >> [1] https://review.openstack.org/247517 > >> [2] > >> > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-December/081006.html > >> [3] https://review.openstack.org/249180 > >> > >> > __________________________________________________________________________ > >> 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 > >> > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > > -- > With best regards, Peter Lemenkov. > > __________________________________________________________________________ > 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 >
__________________________________________________________________________ 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
