Open Stack

I do agree with Chris that process-wise, there was a failure and we
need a way to ensure that it does not happen again. (There was a
config option lost in the shuffle w/o a deprecation period)

On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Chris Behrens <cbehrens at codestud.com> wrote:
>
> On Apr 17, 2014, at 4:26 PM, Joshua Harlow <harlowja at yahoo-inc.com> wrote:
>
> Just an honest question (no negativity intended I swear!).
>
> If a configuration option exists and only works with a patched eventlet why
> is that option an option to begin with? (I understand the reason for the
> patch, don't get me wrong).
>
>
> Right, it’s a valid question. This feature has existed one way or another in
> nova for quite a while. Initially the implementation in nova was wrong. I
> did not know that eventlet was also broken at the time, although I
> discovered it in the process of fixing nova’s code. I chose to leave the
> feature because it’s something that we absolutely need long term, unless you
> really want to live with DB calls blocking the whole process. I know I
> don’t. Unfortunately the bug in eventlet is out of our control. (I made an
> attempt at fixing it, but it’s not 100%. Eventlet folks currently have an
> alternative up that may or may not work… but certainly is not in a release
> yet.)  We have an outstanding bug on our side to track this, also.
>
> The below is comparing apples/oranges for me.
>
> - Chris
>
>
> Most users would not be able to use such a configuration since they do not
> have this patched eventlet (I assume a newer version of eventlet someday in
> the future will have this patch integrated in it?) so although I understand
> the frustration around this I don't understand why it would be an option in
> the first place. An aside, if the only way to use this option is via a
> non-standard eventlet then how is this option tested in the community, aka
> outside of said company?
>
> An example:
>
> If yahoo has some patched kernel A that requires an XYZ config turned on in
> openstack and the only way to take advantage of kernel A is with XYZ config
> 'on', then it seems like that’s a yahoo only patch that is not testable and
> useable for others, even if patched kernel A is somewhere on github it's
> still imho not something that should be a option in the community (anyone
> can throw stuff up on github and then say I need XYZ config to use it).
>
> To me non-standard patches that require XYZ config in openstack shouldn't be
> part of the standard openstack, no matter the company. If patch A is in the
> mainline kernel (or other mainline library), then sure it's fair game.
>
> -Josh
>
> From: Chris Behrens <cbehrens at codestud.com>
> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> Date: Thursday, April 17, 2014 at 3:20 PM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> Subject: [openstack-dev] oslo removal of use_tpool conf option
>
>
> I’m going to try to not lose my cool here, but I’m extremely upset by this.
>
> In December, oslo apparently removed the code for ‘use_tpool’ which allows
> you to run DB calls in Threads because it was ‘eventlet specific’. I noticed
> this when a review was posted to nova to add the option within nova itself:
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/59760/
>
> I objected to this and asked (more demanded) for this to be added back into
> oslo. It was not. What I did not realize when I was reviewing this nova
> patch, was that nova had already synced oslo’s change. And now we’ve
> released Icehouse with a conf option missing that existed in Havana.
> Whatever projects were using oslo’s DB API code has had this option
> disappear (unless an alternative was merged). Maybe it’s only nova.. I don’t
> know.
>
> Some sort of process broke down here.  nova uses oslo.  And oslo removed
> something nova uses without deprecating or merging an alternative into nova
> first. How I believe this should have worked:
>
> 1) All projects using oslo’s DB API code should have merged an alternative
> first.
> 2) Remove code from oslo.
> 3) Then sync oslo.
>
> What do we do now? I guess we’ll have to back port the removed code into
> nova. I don’t know about other projects.
>
> NOTE: Very few people are probably using this, because it doesn’t work
> without a patched eventlet. However, Rackspace happens to be one that does.
> And anyone waiting on a new eventlet to be released such that they could use
> this with Icehouse is currently out of luck.
>
> - Chris
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>



-- 
Davanum Srinivas :: http://davanum.wordpress.com