Open Stack

On Tue, 16 Jun 2015, Sean Dague wrote:

> I was just looking at the patches that put Nova under apache wsgi for
> the API, and there are a few things that I think are going in the wrong
> direction. Largely I think because they were copied from the
> lib/keystone code, which we've learned is kind of the wrong direction.

Yes, that's certainly what I've done the few times I've done it.
devstack is deeply encouraging of cargo culting for reasons that are
not entirely clear.

> The first is the fact that a big reason for putting {SERVICES} under
> apache wsgi is we aren't running on a ton of weird unregistered ports.
> We're running on 80 and 443 (when appropriate). In order to do this we
> really need to namespace the API urls. Which means that service catalog
> needs to be updated appropriately.

So:

a) I'm very glad to hear of this. I've been bristling about the weird
    ports thing for the last year.

b) You make it sound like there's been a plan in place to not use
    those ports for quite some time and we'd get to that when we all
    had some spare time. Where do I go to keep abreast of such plans?

> I also think this -
> https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack/blob/master/lib/nova#L266-L268
> is completely wrong.
>
> The Apache configs should instead specify access rules such that the
> installed console entry point of nova-api can be used in place as the
> WSGIScript.

I'm not able to parse this paragraph in any actionable way. The lines
you reference are one of several ways of telling mod wsgi where the
virtualenv is, which has to happen in some fashion if you are using
a virtualenv.

This doesn't appear to have anything to do with locating the module
that contains the WSGI app, so I'm missing the connection. Can you
explain please?

(Basically I'm keen on getting gnocchi and ceilometer wsgi servers
in devstack aligned with whatever the end game is, so knowing the plan
makes it a bit easier.)

> This should also make lines like -
> https://github.com/openstack-dev/devstack/blob/master/lib/nova#L272 and
> L274 uneeded. (The WSGI Script will be in a known place). It will also
> make upgrades much more friendly.

It sounds like maybe you are saying that the api console script and
the module containing the wsgi 'application' variable ought to be the
same thing. I don't reckon that's a great idea as the api console
scripts will want to import a bunch of stuff that the wsgi application
will not.

Or I may be completely misreading you. It's been a long day, etc.

> I think that we need to get these things sorted before any further
> progression here. Volunteers welcomed to help get us there.

Find me, happy to help. The sooner we can kill wacky port weirdness
the better.

-- 
Chris Dent tw:@anticdent freenode:cdent
https://tank.peermore.com/tanks/cdent