Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Date: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 at 11:30 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Mistral] Porting executor and engine
(not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Mistral] Porting executor and engine to
oslo.messaging
Hi Joshua,
Sorry, I’ve been very busy for the last couple of days and didn’t respond
quickly enough.
Well
(not for usage questions)
openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Mistral] Porting executor and engine to
oslo.messaging
Hi Joshua,
Sorry, I've been very busy for the last couple of days and didn't
respond quickly enough.
Well, first of all, it's my bad
@lists.openstack.orgmailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Mistral] Porting executor and engine to
oslo.messaging
All,
This is a great start. I think the sooner we have this discussion the better.
Any uncertainty in the direction/architecture here is going to stall progress
Winson, nice job!
Now it totally makes sense to me. You’re good to go with this unless others
have objections.
Just one technical dummy question (sorry, I’m not yet familiar with
oslo.messaging): at your picture you have “Transport”, so what can be
specifically except RabbitMQ?
Renat
Thanks. I'll start making the changes. The other transport currently
implemented at oslo.messaging is located at
https://github.com/openstack/oslo.messaging/tree/master/oslo/messaging/_drivers,
prefixed with impl. There are quid and zmq.
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 12:03 AM, Renat Akhmerov
@lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Mistral] Porting executor and engine to
oslo.messaging
Looks good. Thanks, Winson!
Renat, What do you think?
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 10:00 AM, W Chan
m4d.co...@gmail.commailto:m4d.co...@gmail.com wrote:
The following link is the google doc
Sure. Let me give this some thoughts and work with you separately. Before
we speak up, we should have a proposal for discussion.
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Dmitri Zimine d...@stackstorm.com wrote:
Winson,
While you're looking into this and working on the design, may be also
think
Yes, right. Thanks Winson.
Renat Akhmerov
@ Mirantis Inc.
On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:39, W Chan m4d.co...@gmail.com wrote:
Sure. Let me give this some thoughts and work with you separately. Before
we speak up, we should have a proposal for discussion.
On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 9:53 PM,
The following link is the google doc of the proposed engine/executor
message flow architecture.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4TqA9lkW12PZ2dJVFRsS0pGdEU/edit?usp=sharing
The diagram on the right is the scalable engine where one or more engine
sends requests over a transport to one or more
Looks good. Thanks, Winson!
Renat, What do you think?
On Wed, Feb 26, 2014 at 10:00 AM, W Chan m4d.co...@gmail.com wrote:
The following link is the google doc of the proposed engine/executor
message flow architecture.
Renat,
Regarding your comments on change https://review.openstack.org/#/c/75609/,
I don't think the port to oslo.messaging is just a swap from pika to
oslo.messaging. OpenStack services as I understand is usually implemented
as an RPC client/server over a messaging transport. Sync vs async
On 25 Feb 2014, at 02:21, W Chan m4d.co...@gmail.com wrote:
Renat,
Regarding your comments on change https://review.openstack.org/#/c/75609/, I
don't think the port to oslo.messaging is just a swap from pika to
oslo.messaging. OpenStack services as I understand is usually implemented as
Winson,
While you're looking into this and working on the design, may be also think
through other executor/engine communications.
We talked about executor communicating to engine over 3 channels (DB, REST,
RabbitMQ) which I wasn't happy about ;) and put it off for some time. May be it
can be
14 matches
Mail list logo
