Open Stack

I agree heartily with the availability and resiliency aspect.  For me, that
is the biggest reason to consider a NOSQL backend. The other potential
performance benefits are attractive to me also.

-Mike


On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Soren Hansen <soren at linux2go.dk> wrote:

> 2013/11/18 Mike Spreitzer <mspreitz at us.ibm.com>:
> > There were some concerns expressed at the summit about scheduler
> > scalability in Nova, and a little recollection of Boris' proposal to
> > keep the needed state in memory.
>
>
> > I also heard one guy say that he thinks Nova does not really need a
> > general SQL database, that a NOSQL database with a bit of
> > denormalization and/or client-maintained secondary indices could
> > suffice.
>
> I may have said something along those lines. Just to clarify -- since
> you started this post by talking about scheduler scalability -- the main
> motivation for using a non-SQL backend isn't scheduler scalability, it's
> availability and resilience. I just don't accept the failure modes that
> MySQL (and derivatives such as Galera) impose.
>
> > Has that sort of thing been considered before?
>
> It's been talked about on and off since... well, probably since we
> started this project.
>
> > What is the community's level of interest in exploring that?
>
> The session on adding a backend using a non-SQL datastore was pretty
> well attended.
>
>
> --
> Soren Hansen             | http://linux2go.dk/
> Ubuntu Developer         | http://www.ubuntu.com/
> OpenStack Developer      | http://www.openstack.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131120/daa74d51/attachment.html>