[openstack-dev] [Mistral] Local vs. Scalable Engine
m4d.coder at gmail.com
Thu Mar 13 18:15:29 UTC 2014
On the transport variable, the problem I see isn't with passing the
variable to the engine and executor. It's passing the transport into the
API layer. The API layer is a pecan app and I currently don't see a way
where the transport variable can be passed to it directly. I'm looking at
Do you have any suggestion? Thanks.
On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 1:30 AM, Renat Akhmerov <rakhmerov at mirantis.com>wrote:
> On 13 Mar 2014, at 10:40, W Chan <m4d.coder at gmail.com> wrote:
> - I can write a method in base test to start local executor. I will
> do that as a separate bp.
> - After the engine is made standalone, the API will communicate to the
> engine and the engine to the executor via the oslo.messaging transport.
> This means that for the "local" option, we need to start all three
> components (API, engine, and executor) on the same process. If the long
> term goal as you stated above is to use separate launchers for these
> components, this means that the API launcher needs to duplicate all the
> logic to launch the engine and the executor. Hence, my proposal here is to
> move the logic to launch the components into a common module and either
> have a single generic launch script that launch specific components based
> on the CLI options or have separate launch scripts that reference the
> appropriate launch function from the common module.
> Ok, I see your point. Then I would suggest we have one script which we
> could use to run all the components (any subset of of them). So for those
> components we specified when launching the script we use this local
> transport. Btw, scheduler eventually should become a standalone component
> too, so we have 4 components.
> - The RPC client/server in oslo.messaging do not determine the
> transport. The transport is determine via oslo.config and then given
> explicitly to the RPC client/server.
> https://github.com/stackforge/mistral/blob/master/mistral/cmd/task_executor.py#L63are examples for the client and server respectively. The in process Queue
> is instantiated within this transport object from the fake driver. For the
> "local" option, all three components need to share the same transport in
> order to have the Queue in scope. Thus, we will need some method to have
> this transport object visible to all three components and hence my proposal
> to use a global variable and a factory method.
> I'm still not sure I follow your point here.. Looking at the links you
> provided I see this:
> transport = messaging.get_transport(cfg.CONF)
> So my point here is we can make this call once in the launching script and
> pass it to engine/executor (and now API too if we want it to be launched by
> the same script). Of course, we'll have to change the way how we initialize
> these components, but I believe we can do it. So it's just a dependency
> injection. And in this case we wouldn't need to use a global variable. Am I
> still missing something?
> Renat Akhmerov
> @ Mirantis Inc.
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev