[openstack-dev] [api] REST limitations and GraghGL inception?
gael.therond at gmail.com
Tue May 1 21:37:12 UTC 2018
Ok, here are my two cents regarding GraphQL integration within Openstack
and some thoughts around this topic.
1°/- Openstack SDK should still exist and should be in my humble opinion a
critical focus as it allow following benefits for large and medium
• It provide a common and clean structure for Openstack developments and
should be used either by projects or tools willing to integrate Openstack
as it will then create some sort of standard.
For instance, here in my job we have A LOT (More than 10 000 peoples
working within around 130 teams) of teams developing over Openstack using
the SDK as a common shared base layout.
That allow for teams to easily share and co-develop on projects. Those
teams are spread around the world and so need to have clean guidelines as
it avoid them reinventing the wheel, they’re not stuck with someone else
obscure code created by another persons on the other side of the world or
within a different timezone.
Additionally it streamline our support and debug processes.
• We should get a common consensus before all projects start to implement
This point is for me the most important one as it will fix flaws we get
currently with the rest APIs development within Openstack.
First it will avoid a fresh developer to be confused by too many options.
Honestly, I know we are open etc, but this point really need to be
addressed as it is the main issue that I face with Openstack advocacy since
many years now.
Having too many options even if explained within the documentation daunt a
lot of people to quickly give a hand with projects.
For instance I have a workmate that is currently working on an internal
tool which ask me how should he implement its project REST interfaces.
I told him TO NOT use WSME and to stick with what have been done by a major
project. Unfortunately he choose to copy what have been done by Octavia
which is actually using... WSME...
GraphQL gives us the opportunity and ability to fix Openstack development
inconsistencies by providing and enforcing a clean guideline regarding
which library should be used and in which way.
That would also have the side effect to easy the entry level for a new
• New architecture opportunities.
For sure that will bring new architecture opportunities, but the broker
thing is not a good idea as each project should be able to be autonomous.
I personally don’t like centralized services as it bring SPOF.
Let’s take the AMQP example. For now most of Openstack deployments use a
RabbitMQ or broker like system.
Even if each (well at least major vanilla projects) services can (and
should) use ZeroMQ.
I do myself use RabbitMQ but my last weeks were so much
debugging/investigation hell that we now plan to have a serious benchmark
and test of ZMQ.
One thing that I would love to see with GraphQL is a better distributed and
Anyway, I’m glad someone started this discussion as I feel it is a really
important topic that would highly help Openstack on more than just
Le mar. 1 mai 2018 à 05:00, Gilles Dubreuil <gdubreui at redhat.com> a écrit :
> On 01/05/18 11:31, Flint WALRUS wrote:
> Yes, that’s was indeed the sens of my point.
> I was just enforcing it, no worries! ;)
> Openstack have to provide both endpoints type for a while for backward
> compatibility in order to smooth the transition.
> For instance, that would be a good idea to contact postman devteam once
> GraphQL will start to be integrated as it will allow a lot of ops to keep
> their day to day tools by just having to convert their existing collections
> of handful requests.
> Shouldn't we have a common consensus before any project start pushing its
> own GraphQL wheel?
> Also I wonder how GraphQL could open new architecture avenues for
> For example, would that make sense to also have a GraphQL broker linking
> OpenStack services?
> Or alternatively to provide a tool with similar features at least.
> Le mar. 1 mai 2018 à 03:18, Gilles Dubreuil <gdubreui at redhat.com> a
> écrit :
>> On 30/04/18 20:16, Flint WALRUS wrote:
>> I would very much second that question! Indeed it have been one of my own
>> wondering since many times.
>> Of course GraphQL is not intended to replace REST as is and have to live
>> in parallel
>> Effectively a standard initial architecture is to have GraphQL sitting
>> aside (in parallel) and wrapping REST and along the way develop GrapgQL
>> It's seems too early to tell but GraphQL being the next step in API
>> evolution it might ultimately replace REST.
>> but it would likely and highly accelerate all requests within heavily
>> loaded environments
>> So +1 for this question.
>> Le lun. 30 avr. 2018 à 05:53, Gilles Dubreuil <gdubreui at redhat.com> a
>> écrit :
>>> Remember Boston's Summit presentation  about GraphQL  and how it
>>> addresses REST limitations.
>>> I wonder if any project has been thinking about using GraphQL. I haven't
>>> find any mention or pointers about it.
>>> GraphQL takes a complete different approach compared to REST. So we can
>>> finally forget about REST API Description languages
>>> (OpenAPI/Swagger/WSDL/WADL/JSON-API/ETC) and HATEOS (the hypermedia
>>> approach which doesn't describe how to use it).
>>> So, once passed the point where 'REST vs GraphQL' is like comparing SQL
>>> and no-SQL DBMS and therefore have different applications, there are no
>>> doubt the complexity of most OpenStack projects are good candidates for
>>> Besides topics such as efficiency, decoupling, no version management
>>> need there many other powerful features such as API Schema out of the
>>> box and better automation down that track.
>>> It looks like the dream of a conduit between API services and consumers
>>> might have finally come true so we could move-on an worry about other
>>> So has anyone already starting looking into it?
>>>  http://graphql.org
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> Gilles Dubreuil
>> Senior Software Engineer - Red Hat - Openstack DFG Integration
>> Email: gilles at redhat.com
>> GitHub/IRC: gildub
>> Mobile: +61 400 894 219
> Gilles Dubreuil
> Senior Software Engineer - Red Hat - Openstack DFG Integration
> Email: gilles at redhat.com
> GitHub/IRC: gildub
> Mobile: +61 400 894 219
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev