← Back to team overview

openstack team mailing list archive

Re: OpenStack Compute API 1.1


OK, fair enough.

Can I ask what the impetus for moving from AMQP to REST for all
internal APIs is? Seems to me we will be throwing away a lot of
functionality for the benefit of cross-WAN REST communication?


On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Paul Voccio <paul.voccio@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Jay,
> I understand Justin's concern if we move /network and /images and /volume
> to their own endpoints then it would be a change to the customer. I think
> this could be solved by putting a proxy in front of each endpoint and
> routing back to the appropriate service endpoint.
> I added another image on the wiki page to describe what I'm trying to say.
> http://wiki.openstack.org/api_transition
> I think might not be as bad of a transition since the compute worker would
> receive a request for a new compute node then it would proxy over to the
> admin or public api of the network or volume node to request information.
> It would work very similar to how the queues work now.
> pvo
> On 2/17/11 8:33 PM, "Jay Pipes" <jaypipes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>Sorry, I don't view the proposed changes from AMQP to REST as being
>>"customer facing API changes". Could you explain? These are internal
>>interfaces, no?
>>On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 8:13 PM, Justin Santa Barbara
>><justin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> An API is for life, not just for Cactus.
>>> I agree that stability is important.  I don't see how we can claim to
>>> deliver 'stability' when the plan is then immediately to destablize
>>> everything with a very disruptive change soon after, including customer
>>> facing API changes and massive internal re-architecting.
>>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 6:57 PM, Justin Santa Barbara
>>>> <justin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> > Pulling volumes & images out into separate services (and moving from
>>>> > AMQP to
>>>> > REST) sounds like a huge breaking change, so if that is indeed the
>>>> > let's do that asap (i.e. Cactus).
>>>> Sorry, I have to disagree with you here, Justin :)  The Cactus release
>>>> is supposed to be about stability and the only features going into
>>>> Cactus should be to achieve API parity of the OpenStack Compute API
>>>> with the Rackspace Cloud Servers API. Doing such a huge change like
>>>> moving communication from AMQP to HTTP for volume and network would be
>>>> a change that would likely undermine the stability of the Cactus
>>>> release severely.
>>>> -jay
> Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message (including any attached or
> embedded documents) is intended for the exclusive and confidential use of the
> individual or entity to which this message is addressed, and unless otherwise
> expressly indicated, is confidential and privileged information of Rackspace.
> Any dissemination, distribution or copying of the enclosed material is prohibited.
> If you receive this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail
> at abuse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, and delete the original message.
> Your cooperation is appreciated.

Follow ups