Open Stack

On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 6:40 PM, Sean Dague <sean at dague.net> wrote:

> On 02/02/2017 11:16 AM, Matthew Treinish wrote:
> <snip>
> > <oops, forgot to finish my though>
> >
> > We definitely aren't saying running a single worker is how we recommend
> people
> > run OpenStack by doing this. But it just adds on to the differences
> between the
> > gate and what we expect things actually look like.
>
> I'm all for actually getting to the bottom of this, but honestly real
> memory profiling is needed here. The growth across projects probably
> means that some common libraries are some part of this. The ever growing
> requirements list is demonstrative of that. Code reuse is good, but if
> we are importing much of a library to get access to a couple of
> functions, we're going to take a bunch of memory weight on that
> (especially if that library has friendly auto imports in top level
> __init__.py so we can't get only the parts we want).
>

Sounds like the new version of "oslo-incubator" idea.


>
> Changing the worker count is just shuffling around deck chairs.
>
> I'm not familiar enough with memory profiling tools in python to know
> the right approach we should take there to get this down to individual
> libraries / objects that are containing all our memory. Anyone more
> skilled here able to help lead the way?
>
>         -Sean
>
> --
> Sean Dague
> http://dague.net
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> 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
>



-- 
Best regards,
Andrey Kurilin.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170202/cf7638fd/attachment.html>