[openstack-dev] [neutron][nova][oslo] Common backoff & timeout utils

Joshua Harlow harlowja at fastmail.com
Thu Apr 21 18:29:43 UTC 2016


Salvatore Orlando wrote:
>
> On 21 April 2016 at 16:54, Boden Russell <bodenvmw at gmail.com
> <mailto:bodenvmw at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     On 4/20/16 3:29 PM, Doug Hellmann wrote:
>     >  Yes, please, let's try to make that work and contribute upstream if we
>     >  need minor modifications, before we create something new.
>
>     We can leverage the 'retrying' module (already in global requirements).
>     It lacks a few things we need, but those can be implemented using its
>     existing "hooks" today, or, working with the module owner(s) to push a
>     few changes that we need (the later probably provides the "greatest
>     good").
>
>
> Retrying (even if mostly a 1-man effort) already has a history of
> contribution from different sources, including a few OpenStack
> contributors as well.
> It hasn't had many commits in the past 12 months, but this does not mean
> new PRs won't be accepted.
> Starting a new library for something like this really feels like NIH.
>

Yes please (as a person that has contributed to that library); I know 
the retrying library isn't perfect, but let's IMHO do our due diligence 
there before we go off and make something else. I know that's not always 
an easy proposition (or sometimes even the shortest path) but  think it 
is our responsibility to at least try (the library isn't that huge, and 
it is pretty targeted at doing a small thing, so its not like there is a 
massive amount of code or a massive amount of history...)

> As for hooks vs contributions this really depends on what you need to
> add. Can you share more details on the "few things we need" that
> retrying is lacking?
> (and I apologise if you shared them earlier in this thread - I did not
> read all of it)
>
>
>     Assuming we'll leverage 'retrying', I was thinking the initial goals
>     here are:
>     (a) Ensure 'retrying' supports the behaviors we need for our usages in
>     neutron + nova (see [1] - [5] on my initial note) today. Implementation
>     details TBD.
>     (b) Implement a "Backing off RPC client" in oslo, inspired by [1].
>
>
> Do you think oslo_messaging would be a good target? Or do you think it
> should go somewhere else?
>
>     (c) Update nova + neutron to use the "common implementation(s)" rather
>     than 1-offs.
>
>     This sounds fun and I'm happy to take it on. However, I probably won't
>
>     make much progress until after the summit for obvious reasons. I'll plan
>     to lead with code, if a RFE/spec/other is needed please let me know.
>
>
>     Additional comments welcomed.
>
>
>     Thanks
>
>     [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/280595
>
>     __________________________________________________________________________
>     OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>     Unsubscribe:
>     OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>     <http://OpenStack-dev-request@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



More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list