On Jun 26, 2014, at 5:25 PM, Zane Bitter <zbit...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 23/06/14 19:25, Clint Byrum wrote: >> Hello! I would like to turn your attention to this specification draft >> that I've written: >> >> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/100012/1/specs/convergence-continuous-observer.rst >> >> Angus has suggested that perhaps Ceilometer is a better place to handle >> this. Can you please comment on the review, or can we have a brief >> mailing list discussion about how best to filter notifications? >> >> Basically in Heat when a user boots an instance, we would like to act as >> soon as it is active, and not have to poll the nova API to know when >> that is. Angus has suggested that perhaps we can just tell ceilometer to >> hit Heat with a web hook when that happens. > > I'm all in favour of having Ceilometer filter the firehose for us if we can :) > > Webhooks would seem to add a lot of overhead though (set up + tear down a > connection for every notification), that could perhaps be avoided by using a > message bus? Given that both setting up and receiving these notifications > would be admin-only operations, is there any benefit to handling them through > a webhook API rather than through oslo.messaging? > > cheers, > Zane. In larger OpenStack deployments, the different services probably don't share the same message bus. While I certainly agree oslo.messaging and/or oslo.notifications should be an option (and probably the default one at that), I think there should still be an option to use ceilometer or some other notification mechanism. As long as its pluggable, I don't think anyone would be too fussed. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
