Sad, especially since so much is using the database :-( On 3/1/12 2:43 PM, "Adam Young" <ayo...@redhat.com> wrote:
On 03/01/2012 02:48 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya wrote: > On Mar 1, 2012, at 9:39 AM, Adam Young wrote: > >> What would the drawbacks be? Probably the first thing people would look to >> from Eventlet is performance. I don't have the hard numbers to compare >> Eventlet to Apache HTTPD, but I do know that Apache is used in enough high >> volume sites that I would not be overly concerned. The traffic in an >> Openstack deployment to a Keystone server is going to be about two orders of >> magnitude less than any other traffic, and is highly unlikely to be the >> bottleneck. > How did you arrive at this number? Every user has to hit keystone before > making a request to any other service (unless they already have a token) and > each service needs to authenticate that token. Any request that hits multiple > services will hit keystone multiple times. Without caching, keystone is by > far the busiest service in an openstack install. Caching should fix some of > this, but I don't know that I would expect it to be two orders of magnitude > less. > > Vish Seeing as the SQL Alchemy code is blocking on each request, I suspect that performance is now soundly *not* a reason to want to stick with eventlet. My statement that Eventlet is performant is based on the assumption that the benefits of using Greenthreads are realized. It looks like that is not the case. _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
