Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Does OpenStack need a common solution for DLM? (was: Re: [Cinder] A possible solution for HA Active-Active)

2015-08-04 Thread Mark Voelker
On Aug 3, 2015, at 6:09 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote: > > On 03/08/15 19:48 +0200, Gorka Eguileor wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 03:42:48PM +, Fox, Kevin M wrote: >>> I'm usually for abstraction layers, but they don't always pay off very well >>> due to catering to the lowest common denominat

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Does OpenStack need a common solution for DLM? (was: Re: [Cinder] A possible solution for HA Active-Active)

2015-08-03 Thread Mark Voelker
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On Aug 3, 2015, at 6:09 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote: On 03/08/15 19:48 +0200, Gorka Eguileor wrote: On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 03:42:48PM +, Fox, Kevin M wrote: I'm usually for abstraction layers, but they don't always pay off very well due to cater

[openstack-dev] [all] Does OpenStack need a common solution for DLM? (was: Re: [Cinder] A possible solution for HA Active-Active)

2015-08-03 Thread Flavio Percoco
On 03/08/15 19:48 +0200, Gorka Eguileor wrote: On Mon, Aug 03, 2015 at 03:42:48PM +, Fox, Kevin M wrote: I'm usually for abstraction layers, but they don't always pay off very well due to catering to the lowest common denominator. Lets clearly define the problem space first. IFF the proble