Open Stack

Both Logging (Meniscus) and Key Management (Barbican) are using Falcon (http://falconframework.org/) right now. I'm not adverse to a change if needed, but have we addressed the performance issues from the Falcon page? If Pecan serves 9ish times fewer requests, that seems like a rather large red flag.

One benchmark is not enough data to make any decisions, but I didn't see any discussion of the performance of Pecan / WSME in the etherpad from the design summit. Has anyone done any performance testing of the proposed set up?


Jarret


From: Doug Hellmann <doug.hellmann at dreamhost.com<mailto:doug.hellmann at dreamhost.com>>
Reply-To: OpenStack List <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>
Date: Wednesday, May 29, 2013 7:07 PM
To: OpenStack List <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org<mailto:openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>>
Subject: [openstack-dev] [oslo] deprecating openstack.common.wsgi

I have -2ed several changes to the wsgi module in oslo-incubator in the last few weeks, and I wanted to bring it up on the list to explain the reasons more broadly.

At the last summit we agreed that the goal was to start deprecating our home-grown WSGI service implementation in favor of moving to a new set of tools called Pecan and WSME (https://etherpad.openstack.org/havana-common-wsgi). While I understand that we can't just drop everything and build new API servers, I do feel strongly that we should not continue developing new features for the module we are deprecating.

I don't see any other projects with "wsgi" in their openstack-common.conf, nor did I find any copies of openstack/common/wsgi.py in any other projects. I did find several wsgi.py files in different directories in the projects. I take that to mean that we are/were still in the process of unifying the various forked versions of the module, and I propose that we just not bother doing more work on that. Since no project is already using Oslo's wsgi module, I'm not sure it makes sense to bring bug fixes into Oslo, either. If I've missed something, and projects are in fact using the module, then we should continue to deal with bug fixes.

To officially indicate the module as deprecated, Mark suggested moving it to openstack/common/deprecated/wsgi.py. I have done that in changeset https://review.openstack.org/#/c/30972/. As the commit log message mentions, there is still some work to be done to remove the dependency between one or two of the middleware classes and the now deprecated module. I would appreciate any ideas about the best way to do that from folks who know about those modules.

As we move to the new tools, I am sure we will find new bits of code related to setting up those projects that we can share. For example, the code to configure the keystone middleware for an API service shouldn't need to be repeated across all of the projects. We should start a new module to hold those pieces, taken from the projects that are starting to use Pecan and WSME already. I volunteer to be the primary maintainer for that new module within Oslo.

Doug

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20130530/7adba876/attachment.html>