I agree heartily with the availability and resiliency aspect. For me, that is the biggest reason to consider a NOSQL backend. The other potential performance benefits are attractive to me also.
-Mike On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Soren Hansen <so...@linux2go.dk> wrote: > 2013/11/18 Mike Spreitzer <mspre...@us.ibm.com>: > > There were some concerns expressed at the summit about scheduler > > scalability in Nova, and a little recollection of Boris' proposal to > > keep the needed state in memory. > > > > I also heard one guy say that he thinks Nova does not really need a > > general SQL database, that a NOSQL database with a bit of > > denormalization and/or client-maintained secondary indices could > > suffice. > > I may have said something along those lines. Just to clarify -- since > you started this post by talking about scheduler scalability -- the main > motivation for using a non-SQL backend isn't scheduler scalability, it's > availability and resilience. I just don't accept the failure modes that > MySQL (and derivatives such as Galera) impose. > > > Has that sort of thing been considered before? > > It's been talked about on and off since... well, probably since we > started this project. > > > What is the community's level of interest in exploring that? > > The session on adding a backend using a non-SQL datastore was pretty > well attended. > > > -- > Soren Hansen | http://linux2go.dk/ > Ubuntu Developer | http://www.ubuntu.com/ > OpenStack Developer | http://www.openstack.org/ > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev