<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;">
<div>After reviewing the report below, I would recommend that Marconi continue using Falcon for the v1.1 API and then re-evaluate Pecan for v2.0 or possibly look at using swob.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I wanted to post my recommendation to the general list, because my request to continue using Falcon speaks to a broader issue. I think the community can agree that different projects have different needs. A good craftsman has more than one type of hammer
in his toolbox.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Most of the OpenStack APIs to date have been control-plane APIs, not data plane. Swift is a notable exception. Falcon was created to address the needs of a high-traffic data-plane API, while Pecan’s history would suggest that it was conceived as a solution
for building web apps and control plane APIs. Two major differentiators between these types of APIs:</div>
<ol>
<li>Performance (i.e., latency, throughput, efficiency). With a data plane API, every ms counts, esp. when it comes to running a large cloud.</li><li>Diagnostics. When your service is piping a huge number of requests/sec, you become very susceptible to edge cases. Also, the amount of downtime your users will tolerate is quite low, since even a small hiccup means a whole lot of work can’t get done. Having
a smaller code base, minimizing dependencies, and making the code that is there as straightforward, predictable and debuggable as possible becomes very important in situations like these.</li></ol>
<div>Falcon and swob were created to address these needs, hence their use in data plane APIs.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I’d love to get everyone’s thoughts on the requirements of data plane APIs they have been involved with (not necessarily OpenStack projects). </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Kurt</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<div>
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: Calibri, sans-serif;">
<div><br>
</div>
<span id="OLK_SRC_BODY_SECTION">
<div style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:11pt; text-align:left; color:black; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in; BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; PADDING-TOP: 3pt">
<span style="font-weight:bold">From: </span>Balaji Iyer <<a href="mailto:balaji.iyer@RACKSPACE.COM">balaji.iyer@RACKSPACE.COM</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Reply-To: </span>OpenStack Dev <<a href="mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org">openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Date: </span>Tuesday, March 18, 2014 at 11:55 AM<br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">To: </span>OpenStack Dev <<a href="mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org">openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a>><br>
<span style="font-weight:bold">Subject: </span>[openstack-dev] [Marconi] Pecan Evaluation for Marconi<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-size: 14px; font-family: 'Trebuchet MS', sans-serif;">
<div>
<div>I work for Rackspace and Im fairly new to Openstack Ecosystem. Recently, I came across an opportunity to evaluate Pecan for Marconi and produce a comprehensive report. I have not worked with Pecan or Falcon prior to this evaluation, and have no vested
interest in these two frameworks.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Evaluating frameworks is not always easy, but I have strived to cover as many details as applicable. I have evaluated Pecan and Falcon only on how it fits Marconi and this should not be treated as a general evaluation for all products. It is always recommended
to evaluate frameworks based on your product's requirements and its workload.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Benchmarking is not always easy, hence I have spent a good amount of time benchmarking these two frameworks using different tools and under different network and load conditions with Marconi. Some of the experiences I have mentioned in the report are very
subjective and it narrates mine - you may have had a different experience with these frameworks, which is totally acceptable. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Full evaluation report is available here - <a href="https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Marconi/pecan-evaluation">https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Marconi/pecan-evaluation</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thought of sharing this with the community in the hope that someone may find this useful.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks,</div>
<div>Balaji Iyer</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</span></div>
</div>
</span>
</body>
</html>