Open Stack

>
>
>>
> Mirantis does control neither Rabbitmq or Galera. Mirantis cannot assure
> their quality as well.
>

Correct, and rabbitmq was always the pain in the back, preventing any *real
*enterprise usage of openstack where reliability does matter.


> > 2) it has terrible UX
>>
>
> It looks like personal opinion. I'd like to see surveys or operators
> feedbacks. Also, this statement is not constructive as it doesn't have
> alternative solutions.
>

The solution is to get rid of terrible UX wherever possible (i'm not saying
it is always possible, of course)
upstart is just so much better.
And yes, this is my personal opinion and is a summary of escalation team's
experience.


>
>> > 3) it is not reliable
>>
>
> I would say openstack services are not HA reliable. So OCF scripts are
> reaction of operators on these problems. Many of them have child-ish issues
> from release to release. Operators made OCF scripts to fix these problems.
> A lot of openstack are stateful, so they require some kind of stickiness or
> synchronization. Openstack services doesn't have simple health-check
> functionality so it's hard to say it's running well or not. Sighup is still
> a problem for many of openstack services. Etc/etc So, let's be constructive
> here.
>

Well, I prefer to be responsible for what I know and maintain. Thus, I
state that neutron doesn't need to be managed by pacemaker, neither server,
nor all kinds of agents, and that's the path that neutron team will be
taking.

Thanks,
Eugene.

>
>
>> >
>>
>> I disagree with #1 as I do not agree that should be a criteria for an
>> open-source project.  Considering pacemaker is at the core of our
>> controller setup, I would argue that if these are in fact true we need
>> to be using something else.  I would agree that it is a terrible UX
>> but all the clustering software I've used fall in this category.  I'd
>> like more information on how it is not reliable. Do we have numbers to
>> backup these claims?
>>
>> > (3) is not evaluation of the project itself, but just a logical
>> consequence
>> > of (1) and (2).
>> > As a part of escalation team I can say that it has cost our team
>> thousands
>> > of man hours of head-scratching, staring at pacemaker logs which value
>> are
>> > usually slightly below zero.
>> >
>> > Most of openstack services (in fact, ALL api servers) are stateless,
>> they
>> > don't require any cluster management (also, they don't need to be moved
>> in
>> > case of lack of space).
>> > Statefull services like neutron agents have their states being a
>> function of
>> > db state and are able to syncronize it with the server without external
>> > "help".
>> >
>>
>> So it's not an issue with moving services so much as being able to
>> stop the services when a condition is met. Have we tested all OS
>> services to ensure they do function 100% when out of disk space?  I
>> would assume that glance might have issues with image uploads if there
>> is no space to handle a request.
>>
>> > So now usage of pacemaker can be only justified for cases where
>> service's
>> > clustering mechanism requires active monitoring (rabbitmq, galera)
>> > But even there, examples when we are better off without pacemaker are
>> all
>> > around.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Eugene.
>> >
>>
>> After I sent this email, I had further discussions around the issues
>> that I'm facing and it may not be completely related to disk space. I
>> think we might be relying on the expectation that the local rabbitmq
>> is always available but I need to look into that. Either way, I
>> believe we still should continue to discuss this issue as we are
>> managing services in multiple ways on a single host. Additionally I do
>> not believe that we really perform quality health checks on our
>> services.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -Alex
>>
>>
>> >
>> > On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 1:34 PM, Sergey Vasilenko <
>> svasilenko at mirantis.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Mon, Oct 5, 2015 at 12:22 PM, Eugene Nikanorov
>> >> <enikanorov at mirantis.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> No pacemaker for os services, please.
>> >>> We'll be moving out neutron agents from pacemaker control in 8.0,
>> other
>> >>> os services don't need it too.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> could you please provide your arguments.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> /sv
>> >>
>> >>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> >> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> >> Unsubscribe:
>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> > Unsubscribe:
>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>> >
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe:
>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> 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/20151005/89738e3e/attachment.html>