[openstack-dev] [openstack-tc] Incubation Request for Barbican

Jarret Raim jarret.raim at RACKSPACE.COM
Tue Dec 3 03:12:36 UTC 2013


> There are two big parts to this, I think.  One is techincal - a significant 
> portion
> of OpenStack deployments will not work with this because Celery does not
> work with their deployed messaging architecture.
>  See another reply in this thread for an example of someone that sees the
> inability to use Qpid as a roadblock for an example.  This is solvable, but 
> not
> quickly.
>
> The other is somewhat technical, but also a community issue.  Monty
> articulated this well in another reply.  Barbican has made a conflicting 
> library
> choice with what every other project using messaging is using.
> With the number of projects we have, it is in our best interest to strive 
> for
> consistency where we can.  Differences should not be arbitrary.  The
> differences should only be where an exception is well justified.  I don't 
> see
> that as being the case here.  Should everyone using oslo.messaging (or its
> predecessor rpc in oslo-incubator) be using Celery?  Maybe.  I don't know,
> but that's the question at hand.  Ideally this would have come up with a 
> more
> broad audience sooner.  If it did, I'm sorry I missed it.

I understand the concern here and I'm happy to have Barbican look at using 
oslo.messaging during the Icehouse cycle.

I am a bit surprised at the somewhat strong reactions to our choice. When we 
created Barbican, we looked at the messaging frameworks out there for use. At 
the time, oslo.messaging was not packaged, not documented, not tested, had no 
track record and an unknown level of community support.

Celery is a battle-tested library that is widely deployed with a good track 
record, strong community and decent documentation. We made our choice based on 
those factors, just as the same as we would for any library inclusion.

As celery has met our needs up to this point, we saw no reason to revisit the 
decision until now. In that time oslo.messaging  has moved to a separate repo. 
It still has little to no documentation, but the packaging and maintenance 
issues seem to be on the way to being sorted.

So in short, in celery we get a reliable library with good docs that is battle 
tested, but is limited to the transports supported by Kombu. Both celery and 
Kombu are extendable and have many backends including AMQP, Redis, Beanstalk, 
Amazon SQS, CouchDB, MongoDB, ZeroMQ, ZooKeeper, SoftLayer MQ and Pyro.

Oslo.messaging seems to have good support in OpenStack, but still lacks 
documentation and packaging (though some of that is being sorted out now). It 
offers support for qpid which celery seems to lack. It also offers a common 
place for message signing and some other nice to have features for OpenStack.

Based on the commonality in OpenStack (and the lack of anyone else using 
Celery), I think looking to move to oslo.messaging is a good goal. This will 
take some time, but I think doing it by Icehouse seems reasonable. I think 
that is what you and Monty are asking for?

I have added the task to our list on 
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Barbican/Incubation.


Thanks again for all the eyeballs our on application.


Jarret

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6087 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131203/7565b36a/attachment.bin>


More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list