[openstack-dev] [Ceilometer][QA][Tempest][Infra] Ceilometer tempest testing in gate

Sean Dague sean at dague.net
Thu Mar 20 20:31:10 UTC 2014

On 03/20/2014 01:01 PM, David Kranz wrote:
> On 03/20/2014 12:31 PM, Sean Dague wrote:
>> On 03/20/2014 11:35 AM, David Kranz wrote:
>>> On 03/20/2014 06:15 AM, Sean Dague wrote:
>>>> On 03/20/2014 05:49 AM, Nadya Privalova wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>> First of all, thanks for your suggestions!
>>>>> To summarize the discussions here:
>>>>> 1. We are not going to install Mongo (because "is's wrong" ?)
>>>> We are not going to install Mongo "not from base distribution", because
>>>> we don't do that for things that aren't python. Our assumption is
>>>> dependent services come from the base OS.
>>>> That being said, being an integrated project means you have to be able
>>>> to function, sanely, on an sqla backend, as that will always be part of
>>>> your gate.
>>> This is a claim I think needs a bit more scrutiny if by "sanely" you
>>> mean "performant". It seems we have an integrated project that no one
>>> would deploy using the sql db driver we have in the gate. Is any one
>>> doing that?  Is having a scalable sql back end a goal of ceilometer?
>>> More generally, if there is functionality that is of great importance to
>>> any cloud deployment (and we would not integrate it if we didn't think
>>> it was) that cannot be deployed at scale using sqla, are we really going
>>> to say it should not be a part of OpenStack because we refuse, for
>>> whatever reason, to run it in our gate using a driver that would
>>> actually be used? And if we do demand an sqla backend, how much time
>>> should we spend trying to optimize it if no one will really use it?
>>> Though the slow heat job is a little different because the slowness
>>> comes directly from running real use cases, perhaps we should just set
>>> up a "slow ceilometer" job if the sql version is too slow for its budget
>>> in the main job.
>>> It seems like there is a similar thread, at least in part, about this
>>> around marconi.
>> We required a non mongo backend to graduate ceilometer. So I don't think
>> it's too much to ask that it actually works.
>> If the answer is that it will never work and it was a checkbox with no
>> intent to make it work, then it should be deprecated and removed from
>> the tree in Juno, with a big WARNING that you shouldn't ever use that
>> backend. Like Nova now does with all the virt drivers that aren't tested
>> upstream.
>> Shipping in tree code that you don't want people to use is bad for
>> users. Either commit to making it work, or deprecate it and remove it.
>> I don't see this as the same issue as the slow heat job. Heat,
>> architecturally, is going to be slow. It spins up real OSes and does
>> real thinks to them. There is no way that's ever going to be fast, and
>> the dedicated job was a recognition that to support this level of
>> services in OpenStack we need to give them more breathing room.
> Peace. I specifically noted that difference in my original comment. And
> for that reason the heat slow job may not be temporary.
>> Architecturally Ceilometer should not be this expensive. We've got some
>> data showing it to be aberrant from where we believe it should be. We
>> should fix that.
> There are plenty of cases where we have had code that passes gate tests
> with acceptable performance but falls over in real deployment. I'm just
> saying that having a driver that works ok in the gate but does not work
> for real deployments is of no more value that not having it at all.
> Maybe less value.
> How do you propose to solve the problem of getting more ceilometer tests
> into the gate in the short-run? As a practical measure l don't see why
> it is so bad to have a separate job until the complex issue of whether
> it is possible to have a real-world performant sqla backend is resolved.
> Or did I miss something and it has already been determined that sqla
> could be used for large-scale deployments if we just fixed our code?

I think right now the ball is back in the ceilometer court to do some
performance profiling, and lets see what comes of that. I don't think
we're getting more test before the release in any real way.

>> Once we get a base OS in the gate that lets us direct install mongo from
>> base packages, we can also do that. Or someone can 3rd party it today.
>> Then we'll even have comparative results to understand the differences.
> Yes. Do you know which base OS's are candidates for that?

Ubuntu 14.04 will have a sufficient level of Mongo, so some time in the
Juno cycle we should have it in the gate.


Sean Dague
Samsung Research America
sean at dague.net / sean.dague at samsung.com

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 482 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140320/d2401875/attachment.pgp>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list