openstack team mailing list archive

[Eric Day <eday@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Duck farm? :)

Are you two concerned about building a developer community around a
project in Erlang? I'm all for going that route if other folks are
comfortable with it.

I also have some concern around the speed of Erlang. It's great,
especially if you know what primitives can be expensive and how to
tame beam, but it will always be slower (sometimes significantly)
that C/C++ for some tasks.

-Eric

On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 03:26:09PM -0800, Joshua McKenty wrote:
>    +1 for Erlang, as long as we have a duck farm.
> 
>    On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Devin Carlen <devin.carlen@xxxxxxxxx>
>    wrote:
> 
>      I'll put in a +1 for Erlang as an OpenStack supported platform.  We'd be
>      able to write a stable queue with a much more concise code base, and
>      this is project would be a great fit for Erlang.
>      Devin
>      On Feb 17, 2011, at 2:21 PM, Eric Day wrote:
> 
>      > Thanks to everyone who gave great feedback on the first queue service
>      > thread. I've updated the wiki page to include the suggestions.
>      >
>      > http://wiki.openstack.org/QueueService
>      >
>      > With a decent vision of what we want to build, the next step is
>      > figuring out how. In a previous thread it was suggested that the
>      > preferred languages for OpenStack projects are Python, C, and
>      > C++. Since there is an emphasis on speed and efficiency for the
>      > queue service, I suggest we use C++. I expect this service to be
>      > CPU bound and would benefit being able to leverage multiple cores
>      > efficiently (within the same process), so I don't think Python
>      > is a good fit. I think C++ is a better fit than C due to the need
>      > for modular interfaces. While this can obviously be done in C, C++
>      > APIs are more concise and much less error prone. The OO style will
>      > also make it easier for Python developers who also want to learn and
>      > assist with C++ projects.
>      >
>      > Erlang is not on the preferred lists, but I would also put it out
>      > there as an option. While it may be a great fit for a project like
>      > this, I worry it won't attract the developer resources since Erlang
>      > isn't really a first-class language yet.
>      >
>      > If we decide to take the C++ path, I propose using a modular
>      > application framework I've been working on over the past year (mostly
>      > in my spare time). It provides a simple module programming interface
>      > with dependency tracking (kind of like Linux kernel modules). It
>      > already provides a multi-threaded event module (currently based on
>      > libevent, but this is pluggable) with simple networking abstractions
>      > built on top of it. We should be able to dive in an start writing the
>      > HTTP protocol module and queue processing modules. You can check out
>      > the current project at:
>      >
>      > https://launchpad.net/scalestack
>      > http://scalestack.org/
>      >
>      > The intention of using a framework like this is so we can easily reuse
>      > the other modules (auth, HTTP, logging, ...) for other OpenStack
>      > services in the future. Much like we use Eventlet, WSGI, etc. (and
>      > eventually openstack-common) for Python, we could prefer using the
>      > modules in Scale Stack for lower level projects.
>      >
>      > Thoughts?
>      > -Eric
>      >
>      > _______________________________________________
>      > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>      > Post to     : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>      > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> 
>      _______________________________________________
>      Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>      Post to     : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>      Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
>      More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp