<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body>
I have been of the same opinion as far as upgrades go.<br>
<br>
I think we are stepping ahead of ourselves here a bit. We need to
figure out the rolling upgrade story first and see if registry is
actually useful or not there as well.<br>
<br>
The feedback from operator sessions also indicated that some ops do
use it that way (
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-May/094034.html">http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-May/094034.html</a>
).<br>
<br>
Overall, I do think registry is a bit of overhead and it would be
nice to actually deprecate it but we do need facts/technical
research first.<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/12/16 9:20 PM, Sam Morrison wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:127A4B90-DD9D-47EB-8EAD-6E96EF953B1E@gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">We find glance registry quite useful. Have a central glance-registry api is useful when you have multiple datacenters all with glance-apis and talking back to a central registry service. I guess they could all talk back to the central DB server but currently that would be over the public Internet for us. Not really an issue, we can work around it.
The major thing that the registry has given us has been rolling upgrades. We have been able to upgrade our registry first then one by one upgrade our API servers (we have about 15 glance-apis)
I don’t think we would’ve been able to do that if all the glance-apis were talking to the DB, (At least not in glance’s current state)
Sam
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On 12 May 2016, at 1:51 PM, Flavio Percoco <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:flavio@redhat.com"><flavio@redhat.com></a> wrote:
Greetings,
The Glance team is evaluating the needs and usefulness of the Glance Registry
service and this email is a request for feedback from the overall community
before the team moves forward with anything.
Historically, there have been reasons to create this service. Some deployments
use it to hide database credentials from Glance public endpoints, others use it
for scaling purposes and others because v1 depends on it. This is a good time
for the team to re-evaluate the need of these services since v2 doesn't depend
on it.
So, here's the big question:
Why do you think this service should be kept around?
Summit etherpad: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/newton-glance-registry-deprecation">https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/newton-glance-registry-deprecation</a>
Flavio
--
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-operators mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-operators@lists.openstack.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe">OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Thanks,
Nikhil</pre>
</body>
</html>