Open Stack

+1. Well put.  No one is arguing against this other approach.  The two
efforts can be taken independently.

Carl
On Jul 11, 2014 10:48 PM, "Mike Bayer" <mbayer at redhat.com> wrote:

>
> On 7/11/14, 11:26 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
> > Yep, couldn't agree more.
> >
> > Frankly, the steps you outline in the wiki above are excellent
> > examples of where we can make significant gains in both performance
> > and scalability. In addition to those you listed, the underlying
> > database schemas themselves, with the excessive use of large VARCHAR
> > fields, BLOB fields for JSONified values, and the general bad strategy
> > of bunching heavily-read fields with infrequently-read fields in the
> > same tables, are also a source of poor overall database performance.
> Well the topic of schema modifications I actually left out of that
> document entirely for starters - I made a conscious choice to focus
> entirely on things that don't involve any apps changing any of their
> fundamental approaches or schemas...at least just yet! :)    I'm hoping
> that as oslo.db improves and the patterns start to roll out, we can
> start working on schema design too.    Because yeah I've seen the giant
> lists of VARCHAR everything and just said, OK well we're going to have
> to get to that..just not right now :).
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140712/4e1fc644/attachment.html>