Open Stack

Excerpts from corvus's message of 2017-06-09 09:41:37 -0700:
> Monty Taylor <mordred at inaugust.com> writes:
> 
> > We should use aiohttp with no extra REST framework.
> >
> > Meaning:
> >
> > - aiohttp serving REST and websocket streaming in a scale-out tier
> > - talking RPC to the scheduler over gear or zk
> > - possible in-process aiohttp endpoints for k8s style health endpoints
> 
> ...
> 
> > Since we're starting fresh, I like the idea of a single API service
> > that RPCs to zuul and nodepool, so I like the idea of using ZK for the
> > RPC layer. BUT - using gear and adding just gear worker threads back
> > to nodepol wouldn't be super-terrible maybe.
> 
> Thanks for the thoughtful analysis.  I think your argument is compelling
> and I generally like the approach you suggest.
> 
> On the RPC front, how about we accept that, for the moment, the
> webserver will need to consult ZK for collecting some information
> (current nodepool label/image status), and use gear for other things
> (querying zuul about build status)?
> 
> The rest of Zuul already uses both things, let's just have the webserver
> do the same.  Eventually gear functions will be replaced with ZK.
> 

Your words are more succinct than what I wrote, which is nice. I think
we agree on the general direction for the time being.

However, I don't think ZK will be a good choice for async event
handling. I'd sooner expect MQTT to replace gear for that. It's worth
noting that MQTT's protocol shares a lot in common with gearman and was
created to do similar things.