Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][zmq]

[Davanum Srinivas]

Hear hear! nice work Oleksii and team!

-- Dims

On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Doug Hellmann 
wrote:

> Excerpts from ozamiatin's message of 2015-09-16 18:24:53 +0300:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I'm excited to report that today we have merged [1] new zmq driver into
> > oslo.messaging master branch.
> > The driver is not completely done yet, so we are going to continue
> > developing it on the master branch now.
> >
> > What we've reached for now is passing functional tests gate (we are
> > going to turn it on in the master [2]).
> > And we also have devstack up and running (almost 80% tempest tests
> > passed when I've tested it since last commit into feature/zmq). I need
> > to check all this after merge, to ensure that I didn't break something
> > resolving conflicts.
> >
> > I'm going to put all ongoing tasks on launchpad and provide some
> > documentation soon, so anyone is welcome to develop new zmq driver.
> > I also would like to thank Viktor Serhieiev and Doug Royal who already
> > contributed to feature/zmq.
> >
> > [1] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/223877
> > [2] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/224035
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Oleksii
> >
>
> Congratulations on merging those changes into master! I know it has been
> a long road, but I'm glad to see zmq reaching a usable state. Many
> thanks to the entire team contributing to the work!
>
> Doug
>
> __
> 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
>



-- 
Davanum Srinivas :: https://twitter.com/dims
__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][zmq]

[Doug Hellmann]

Excerpts from ozamiatin's message of 2015-09-16 18:24:53 +0300:
> Hi All,
> 
> I'm excited to report that today we have merged [1] new zmq driver into 
> oslo.messaging master branch.
> The driver is not completely done yet, so we are going to continue 
> developing it on the master branch now.
> 
> What we've reached for now is passing functional tests gate (we are 
> going to turn it on in the master [2]).
> And we also have devstack up and running (almost 80% tempest tests 
> passed when I've tested it since last commit into feature/zmq). I need 
> to check all this after merge, to ensure that I didn't break something 
> resolving conflicts.
> 
> I'm going to put all ongoing tasks on launchpad and provide some 
> documentation soon, so anyone is welcome to develop new zmq driver.
> I also would like to thank Viktor Serhieiev and Doug Royal who already 
> contributed to feature/zmq.
> 
> [1] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/223877
> [2] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/224035
> 
> Thanks,
> Oleksii
> 

Congratulations on merging those changes into master! I know it has been
a long road, but I'm glad to see zmq reaching a usable state. Many
thanks to the entire team contributing to the work!

Doug

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][zmq]

[Clint Byrum]

Excerpts from ozamiatin's message of 2015-09-16 08:24:53 -0700:
> Hi All,
> 
> I'm excited to report that today we have merged [1] new zmq driver into 
> oslo.messaging master branch.
> The driver is not completely done yet, so we are going to continue 
> developing it on the master branch now.
> 
> What we've reached for now is passing functional tests gate (we are 
> going to turn it on in the master [2]).
> And we also have devstack up and running (almost 80% tempest tests 
> passed when I've tested it since last commit into feature/zmq). I need 
> to check all this after merge, to ensure that I didn't break something 
> resolving conflicts.
> 
> I'm going to put all ongoing tasks on launchpad and provide some 
> documentation soon, so anyone is welcome to develop new zmq driver.
> I also would like to thank Viktor Serhieiev and Doug Royal who already 
> contributed to feature/zmq.
> 
> [1] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/223877
> [2] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/224035
> 


Oleksii, this is great news. Thanks so much for your hard work on this!

__
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-dev] [oslo.messaging][zmq]

[ozamiatin]

Hi All,

I'm excited to report that today we have merged [1] new zmq driver into 
oslo.messaging master branch.
The driver is not completely done yet, so we are going to continue 
developing it on the master branch now.


What we've reached for now is passing functional tests gate (we are 
going to turn it on in the master [2]).
And we also have devstack up and running (almost 80% tempest tests 
passed when I've tested it since last commit into feature/zmq). I need 
to check all this after merge, to ensure that I didn't break something 
resolving conflicts.


I'm going to put all ongoing tasks on launchpad and provide some 
documentation soon, so anyone is welcome to develop new zmq driver.
I also would like to thank Viktor Serhieiev and Doug Royal who already 
contributed to feature/zmq.


[1] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/223877
[2] - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/224035

Thanks,
Oleksii


__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][zmq] Redundant zmq.Context creation

[Li Ma]

Any news here? Per-socket solution is a conservative solution that
makes zeromq driver work for multiple-workers. Neutron-server has
api-worker and rpc-worker. I'm not sure per-driver is applicable. I
will try to figure it out soon.

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 7:53 PM, Oleksii Zamiatin
 wrote:
> 23.01.15, 13:22, Elena Ezhova пишет:
>
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Ilya Pekelny  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:46 PM, ozamiatin 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> IMHO It should be created once per Reactor/Client or even per driver
>>> instance.
>>
>>
>> Per driver, sounds good.
>
> Wouldn't this create regression for Neutron? The original change was
> supposed to fix the bug [1], where each api-worker process got the same copy
> of the Context due to its singletony nature.
>
> It wouldn't be a singleton now, beacuse each process should have it's own
> driver instance. We of course will check this case. Each api-worker should
> take their own context. The purpose now is to have not more than one context
> per worker.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> By the way (I didn't check it yet with current implementation of the
>>> driver) such approach should break the IPC, because such kind of sockets
>>> should be produced from the same context.
>>
>>
>> Please, check it. Looks like a potential bug.
>>
>> __
>> 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
>>
>
> [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1364814
>
>
> __
> 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
>



-- 

Li Ma (Nick)
Email: skywalker.n...@gmail.com

__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][zmq] Redundant zmq.Context creation

[Oleksii Zamiatin]

23.01.15, 13:22, Elena Ezhova ?:



On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Ilya Pekelny > wrote:




On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:46 PM, ozamiatin
mailto:ozamia...@mirantis.com>> wrote:

IMHO It should be created once per Reactor/Client or even per
driver instance.


Per driver, sounds good.

Wouldn't this create regression for Neutron? The original change was 
supposed to fix the bug [1], where each api-worker process got the 
same copy of the Context due to its singletony nature.
It wouldn't be a singleton now, beacuse each process should have it's 
own driver instance. We of course will check this case. Each api-worker 
should take their own context. The purpose now is to have not more than 
one context per worker.




By the way (I didn't check it yet with current implementation
of the driver) such approach should break the IPC, because
such kind of sockets should be produced from the same context.

Please, check it. Looks like a potential bug.

__
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

[1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1364814


__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][zmq] Redundant zmq.Context creation

[Elena Ezhova]

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Ilya Pekelny  wrote:

>
>
> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:46 PM, ozamiatin 
> wrote:
>
>> IMHO It should be created once per Reactor/Client or even per driver
>> instance.
>>
>
> Per driver, sounds good.
>
Wouldn't this create regression for Neutron? The original change was
supposed to fix the bug [1], where each api-worker process got the same
copy of the Context due to its singletony nature.

>
>
>>
>> By the way (I didn't check it yet with current implementation of the
>> driver) such approach should break the IPC, because such kind of sockets
>> should be produced from the same context.
>>
>
> Please, check it. Looks like a potential bug.
>
> __
> 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
>
>
[1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1364814
__
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

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo.messaging][zmq] Redundant zmq.Context creation

[Ilya Pekelny]

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:46 PM, ozamiatin  wrote:

> IMHO It should be created once per Reactor/Client or even per driver
> instance.
>

Per driver, sounds good.


>
> By the way (I didn't check it yet with current implementation of the
> driver) such approach should break the IPC, because such kind of sockets
> should be produced from the same context.
>

Please, check it. Looks like a potential bug.
__
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-dev] [oslo.messaging][zmq] Redundant zmq.Context creation

[ozamiatin]

Hi,

Working on zmq driver I've noticed that for now zmq.Context is created 
per socket which is definitely redundant. That was introduced by the change


https://review.openstack.org/#/c/126914/5/oslo/messaging/_drivers/impl_zmq.py

It makes the correct thing reducing the global context variable, but I 
think the context is still should have more global scope than per socket.


IMHO It should be created once per Reactor/Client or even per driver 
instance.


By the way (I didn't check it yet with current implementation of the 
driver) such approach should break the IPC, because such kind of sockets 
should be produced from the same context.


Regards,
Oleksii Zamiatin

__
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