On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Angus Salkeld <asalkeld at mirantis.com> wrote: > Hi all > > The HA session was really well attended and I'd like to give some feedback > from the session. > > Firstly there is some really good content here: > https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-crossproject-ha-integration > > 1. We SHOULD provide better health checks for OCF resources ( > http://linux-ha.org/wiki/OCF_Resource_Agents). > These should be fast and reliable. We should probably bike shed on some > convention like "<project>-manage healthcheck" > and then roll this out for each project. > > 2. We should really move > https://github.com/madkiss/openstack-resource-agents to stackforge or > openstack if the author is agreeable to it (it's referred to in our > official docs). > > I have chatted to the author of this repo and he is happy for it to live under stackforge or openstack. Or each OCF resource going into each of the projects. Does anyone have any particular preference? I suspect stackforge will be the path of least resistance. -Angus > 3. All services SHOULD support Active/Active configurations > (better scaling and it's always tested) > > 4. We should be testing HA (there are a number of ideas on the etherpad > about this) > > 5. Many services do not recovery in the case of failure mid-task > This seems like a big problem to me (some leave the DB in a mess). > Someone linked to an interesting article ( > crash-only-software: http://lwn.net/Articles/191059/) > <http://lwn.net/Articles/191059/> that suggests that we if we do this > correctly we should not need the concept of clean shutdown. > ( > https://github.com/openstack/oslo-incubator/blob/master/openstack/common/service.py#L459-L471 > ) > I'd be interested in how people think this needs to be approached > (just raise bugs for each?). > > Regards > Angus > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20141113/e9528767/attachment.html>