Open Stack

On 09/17/2015 10:04 PM, Jim Rollenhagen wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2015 at 06:48:50PM -0400, Davanum Srinivas wrote:
>> In the fuel project, we recently ran into a couple of issues with Apache2 +
>> mod_wsgi as we switched Keystone to run . Please see [1] and [2].
>>
>> Looking deep into Apache2 issues specifically around "apache2ctl graceful"
>> and module loading/unloading and the hooks used by mod_wsgi [3]. I started
>> wondering if Apache2 + mod_wsgi is the "right" solution and if there was
>> something else better that people are already using.
>>
>> One data point that keeps coming up is, all the CI jobs use Apache2 +
>> mod_wsgi so it must be the best solution....Is it? If not, what is?
> Disclaimer: it's been a while since I've cared about performance with a
> web server in front of a Python app.
>
> IIRC, mod_wsgi was abandoned for a while, but I think it's being worked
> on again. In general, I seem to remember it being thought of as a bit
> old and crusty, but mostly working.

I am not aware of that.  It has been the workhorse of the Python/wsgi 
world for a while, and we use it heavily.

>
> At a previous job, we switched from Apache2 + mod_wsgi to nginx + uwsgi[0]
> and saw a significant performance increase. This was a Django app. uwsgi
> is fairly straightforward to operate and comes loaded with a myriad of
> options[1] to help folks make the most of it. I've played with Ironic
> behind uwsgi and it seemed to work fine, though I haven't done any sort
> of load testing. I'd encourage folks to give it a shot. :)

Again, switching web servers is as likely to introduce as to solve 
problems.  If there are performance issues:

1.  Idenitfy what causes them
2.  Change configuration settings to deal with them
3.  Fix upstream bugs in the underlying system.


Keystone is not about performance.  Keystone is about security.  The 
cloud is designed to scale horizontally first.  Before advocating 
switching to a difference web server, make sure it supports the 
technologies required.


1. TLS at the latest level
2. Kerberos/GSSAPI/SPNEGO
3. X509 Client cert validation
4. SAML

OpenID connect would be a good one to add to the list;  Its been 
requested for a while.

If Keystone is having performance issues, it is most likely at the 
database layer, not the web server.



"Programmers waste enormous amounts of time thinking about, or worrying 
about, the speed of noncritical parts of their programs, and these 
attempts at efficiency actually have a strong negative impact when 
debugging and maintenance are considered. We /should/ forget about small 
efficiencies, say about 97% of the time: *premature optimization is the 
root of all evil.* Yet we should not pass up our opportunities in that 
critical 3%." --Donald Knuth



>
> Of course, uwsgi can also be ran behind Apache2, if you'd prefer.
>
> gunicorn[2] is another good option that may be worth investigating; I
> personally don't have any experience with it, but I seem to remember
> hearing it has good eventlet support.
>
> // jim
>
> [0] https://uwsgi-docs.readthedocs.org/en/latest/
> [1] https://uwsgi-docs.readthedocs.org/en/latest/Options.html
> [2] http://gunicorn.org/
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> 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/20150918/3cae3b10/attachment.html>