Open Stack

We find glance registry quite useful. Have a central glance-registry api is useful when you have multiple datacenters all with glance-apis and talking back to a central registry service. I guess they could all talk back to the central DB server but currently that would be over the public Internet for us. Not really an issue, we can work around it.

The major thing that the registry has given us has been rolling upgrades. We have been able to upgrade our registry first then one by one upgrade our API servers (we have about 15 glance-apis) 

I don’t think we would’ve been able to do that if all the glance-apis were talking to the DB, (At least not in glance’s current state)

Sam




> On 12 May 2016, at 1:51 PM, Flavio Percoco <flavio at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> Greetings,
> 
> The Glance team is evaluating the needs and usefulness of the Glance Registry
> service and this email is a request for feedback from the overall community
> before the team moves forward with anything.
> 
> Historically, there have been reasons to create this service. Some deployments
> use it to hide database credentials from Glance public endpoints, others use it
> for scaling purposes and others because v1 depends on it. This is a good time
> for the team to re-evaluate the need of these services since v2 doesn't depend
> on it.
> 
> So, here's the big question:
> 
> Why do you think this service should be kept around?
> 
> Summit etherpad: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/newton-glance-registry-deprecation
> 
> Flavio
> -- 
> @flaper87
> Flavio Percoco
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-operators mailing list
> OpenStack-operators at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators