Open Stack

+1
________________________________________
From: Thierry Carrez [thierry at openstack.org]
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 3:00 AM
To: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][devstack][all] ZooKeeper vs etcd for Tooz/DLM

Fox, Kevin M wrote:
> With my operator hat on, I would like to use the etcd backend, as I'm already paying the cost of maintaining etcd clusters as part of Kubernetes. Adding Zookeeper is a lot more work.

+1

In the spirit of better operationally integrating with Kubernetes, I
think we need to support etcd, at least as an option.

As I mentioned in another thread, for base services like databases,
message queues and distributed lock managers, the Architecture WG
started to promote an expand/contract model. Start by supporting a
couple viable options, and then once operators / the market decides on
one winner, contract to only supporting that winner, and start using the
specific features of that technology.

For databases and message queues, it's more than time for us to
contract. For DLMs, we are in the expand phase. We should only support a
very limited set of valuable options though -- no need to repeat the
mistakes of the past and support a dozen options just because we can.
Here it seems Zookeeper gives us the mature / featureful angle, and etcd
covers the Kubernetes cooperation / non-Java angle. I don't really see
the point of supporting a third option.

--
Thierry Carrez (ttx)

__________________________________________________________________________
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