Clint Byrum <cl...@fewbar.com> writes: > Are the jobs so complicated that you can't just write a dedicated gearman > worker to do the translation to/from zk? I mean, gearman is really really > really simple for a reason. > > Just saying.. might be simpler to write a throw-away 500 line python gear > worker, than modifying nodepool. And you know how against rewrites I am, > but in this case.. it's not a rewrite, but a shim.
That would be easy, but there are no jobs to reimplement in that way. The current version of nodepool is not a gearman worker, rather it is a gearman administrative client which inspects the status of the gearman queue to infer whether there are enough nodes on-line to satisfy the demand based on guesses it makes as to which jobs it expects to run on each of the available image types. Notably, there is no zuul -> nodepool request process. That is what we're adding in v3. And with good reason. In order for the current version of nodepool to operate, it requires a significant amount of state information which it uses in the (rather complex) calculations it performs to decide when, where, and which nodes to launch. I believe that by modifying nodepool to replace the relatively simple (thanks to shade) "request a node from the cloud" bit with "request a node from v3 nodepool", Monty will be making the minimal change needed to create the shim. Anything else likely involves a change to the complex side-channel interactions that nodepool performs now. -Jim _______________________________________________ OpenStack-Infra mailing list OpenStack-Infra@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-infra