Re: [ovirt-devel] Killing XMLRPC on master
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Martin Sivak <msivak(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> 1. Mom is still using xmlrpc
>
> Mom must move to jsonrpc.
> Martin: can you update on progress of this work?
We would like to avoid going through VDSM completely, except from the
broker part. Is it possible now to "parasitically" listen to vdsm
events and engine commands without having to go through VDSM API?
Sounds like a good plan.
Piotr, how far are we from letting mom listen to engine queue so it get engine
events/responses for certain verbs?
You can drop XML RPC,. vdsm does not depend on MOM working anymore.
Just the balloon and ksm stats will be missing from data that are
being sent to the engine.
Balloon and ksm stats are sent today from mom to vdsm, and reported by
vdsm to engine?
If vdsm is only a middleman and does not use this info, best to send
it directly
to engine via the stomp broker part of vdsm.
Piotr, how far are we from having engine listening for mom events using the
vdsm broker?
There also were some issues with eventfd in the json library, I
assume
those are fixed now.
They should be fixed here:
https://gerrit.ovirt.org/57942
But suffering from these issue show that the api was not use properly,
you should create one client and reuse it for the entire life of the
application.
Nir
Martin
On Sun, Jun 19, 2016 at 1:02 PM, Nir Soffer <nsoffer(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We are still wasting time on maintaining both xmlrpc and jsonrpc. If we kill
> xmlrpc, we can greatly simplify the code base, making it easier to mainain
> and add new features.
>
> I suggest to kill xmlrpc in 4.1, and disable it *now* on master.
>
> Currently the we have 3 issues:
>
> 1. Mom is still using xmlrpc
>
> Mom must move to jsonrpc.
> Martin: can you update on progress of this work?
>
> 2. sos plugin using vdsClient
>
> Need to port it to use jsonrpc library, or jsonrpc client
>
> New jsonrpc client: https://gerrit.ovirt.org/35181
>
> 3. Engine is using xmlrpc server for ovf upload/download
>
> We must support current engine in 4.1, so we cannot remove
> upload/download feature in this version, but we can remove the
> xmlrpc support in this server.
>
> Currently we abuse the xmlrpc server, supporting PUT and GET for
> upload and download (XMLRPC is using only POST). We can disable
> POST requests in protocoldetector, and not register anything with
> the xmlrpc server.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Nir