Open Stack

On May 20, 2013, at 10:48 AM, Vishvananda Ishaya <vishvananda at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> On May 17, 2013, at 4:55 PM, Chris Behrens <cbehrens at codestud.com> wrote:
>>> In the BP you wrote: "The only downside I see of moving this logic into nova-api is that we would slow down the response time from nova-api to provision instances."
>> 
>> I object to any change that's going to slow down API responses for create (or really for '*').  We want the API to return as quickly as possible.  There are things that happen in the background for this reason where otherwise it may be nice to receive an error via the API.  I believe that this is one of those cases.
> 
>> 
>> Ultimately the problem here is a user not having enough insight into errors that occur during the build process.  Users are supposed to be able to look at instance faults to figure out why something failed.  Perhaps faults need to be re-thought or perhaps we're just not using them enough.  But I completely disagree with adding queries to quantum in nova-api during the build request.
> 
> Just because we do it on the 'api' side, it doesn't mean that nova has to wait to return to the user. This could be put into a greenthread or sent off to conductor/orchestrator/scheduler to handle before calling down to the compute node.
> 

Yes, this is true and I'd be fine with that as well.  It seemed like the original intent was to be able to provide a failure message via the API, however.  And that's the part I disagree with, because any implementation (without some sort of caching of ports, etc) will impact API response times.

- Chris


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20130520/c1861ea4/attachment.html>