Open Stack

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 4:11 AM, Julien Danjou <julien at danjou.info> wrote:

> On Thu, May 30 2013, Tim Bell wrote:
>
> > I hope that ceilometer can also include this within the Havana timeframe
> as
> > it becomes a key component of production, large scale
> > clouds.
>
> I think we all agree in principle. We'd be happy to enhance Ceilometer
> and fix potential bugs in this direction, but we'll require some help
> testing the upgrade path *before* Havana is released.
>

Right, and upgrades are a different issue than running production systems
long-term on mixed versions.

Most of the problems between grizzly or trunk ceilometer and folsom have
had to do with proof-of-concept deployments where people were trying to
install a "modern" ceilometer on the same server as another component that
was older. Because the services require incompatible libraries and were
running on the same host using the same site-packages directories, there
are conflicts and things broke (either ceilometer, or the other service).
Deploying into virtualenvs or using separate hosts will reduce (if not
eliminate) these problems. The protocol ceilometer uses to talk over the
message bus is compatible between versions, AFAIK, so should not have
issues with rolling upgrades.

Doug


>
> --
> Julien Danjou
> # Free Software hacker # freelance consultant
> # http://julien.danjou.info
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack/attachments/20130531/604166e6/attachment.html>