Open Stack

Ok new versions have reversed the order so we can take:

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/121663/4

before:

https://review.openstack.org/#/c/119521/10

I still strongly recommend that we take the second so we at least have
the possibility of backporting the other two patches. And I also wouldn’t
complain if we just took all 4 :)

Vish

On Sep 25, 2014, at 9:44 AM, Vishvananda Ishaya <vishvananda at gmail.com> wrote:

> To explain my rationale:
> 
> I think it is totally reasonable to be conservative and wait to merge
> the actual fixes to the network calls[1][2] until Kilo and have them
> go through the stable/backports process. Unfortunately, due to our object
> design, if we block https://review.openstack.org/#/c/119521/ then there
> is no way we can backport those fixes, so we are stuck for a full 6
> months with abysmal performance. This is why I’ve been pushing to get
> that one fix in. That said, I will happily decouple the two patches.
> 
> Vish
> 
> [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/119522/9
> [2] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/119523/10
> 
> On Sep 24, 2014, at 3:51 PM, Michael Still <mikal at stillhq.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> so, I'd really like to see https://review.openstack.org/#/c/121663/
>> merged in rc1. That patch is approved right now.
>> 
>> However, it depends on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/119521/, which
>> is not approved. 119521 fixes a problem where we make five RPC calls
>> per call to get_network_info, which is an obvious efficiency problem.
>> 
>> Talking to Vish, who is the author of these patches, it sounds like
>> the efficiency issue is a pretty big deal for users of nova-network
>> and he'd like to see 119521 land in Juno. I think that means he's
>> effectively arguing that the bug is release critical.
>> 
>> On the other hand, its only a couple of days until rc1, so we're
>> trying to be super conservative about what we land now in Juno.
>> 
>> So... I'd like to see a bit of a conversation on what call we make
>> here. Do we land 119521?
>> 
>> Michael
>> 
>> -- 
>> Rackspace Australia
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140925/a170b8e6/attachment.pgp>