[Openstack-operators] [openstack-dev] [glance] glance-registry deprecation: Request for feedback

Flavio Percoco flavio at redhat.com
Fri May 13 19:36:43 UTC 2016

On 12/05/16 21:41 -0400, Nikhil Komawar wrote:
>I have been of the same opinion as far as upgrades go.
>I think we are stepping ahead of ourselves here a bit. We need to figure out
>the rolling upgrade story first and see if registry is actually useful or not
>there as well.

I kinda disagree, tbh. We can have a glance-api service that can be upgraded
with no downtimes without the need of a registry service.

>The feedback from operator sessions also indicated that some ops do use it that
>way ( http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-May/094034.html
>Overall, I do think registry is a bit of overhead and it would be nice to
>actually deprecate it but we do need facts/technical research first.
>On 5/12/16 9:20 PM, Sam Morrison wrote:
>    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'm curious to know how you did this upgrade, though. Did you shutdown your
registry nodes, upgraded the database and then re-started them? Did you upgraded
one registry node at a time?

I'm asking because, as far as I can tell, the strategy you used for upgrading
the registry nodes is the one you would use to upgrade the glance-api nodes
today. Shutting down all registry nodes would live you with unusable glance-api
nodes anyway so I'd assume you did a partial upgrade or something similar to

Thanks a bunch for your feedback,

>    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
>    __________________________________________________________________________
>    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

Flavio Percoco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-operators/attachments/20160513/ba8c6c88/attachment.pgp>

More information about the OpenStack-operators mailing list