On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Martin Betak <mbetak(a)redhat.com> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Marek Libra" <mlibra(a)redhat.com>
> To: "Martin Perina" <mperina(a)redhat.com>
> Cc: "Piotr Kliczewski" <pkliczew(a)redhat.com>, "Michal
Skrivanek" <
mskrivan(a)redhat.com>, "engine-devel(a)ovirt.org"
> <devel(a)ovirt.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 5:19:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Push notifications in 4.0 backend
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Martin Perina" <mperina(a)redhat.com>
> > To: "Eli Mesika" <emesika(a)redhat.com>
> > Cc: "Piotr Kliczewski" <pkliczew(a)redhat.com>,
"engine-devel(a)ovirt.org"
> > <devel(a)ovirt.org>, "Michal Skrivanek"
> > <mskrivan(a)redhat.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, 25 November, 2015 11:20:49 AM
> > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Push notifications in 4.0 backend
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Eli Mesika" <emesika(a)redhat.com>
> > > To: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs(a)redhat.com>
> > > Cc: "Piotr Kliczewski" <pkliczew(a)redhat.com>, "Michal
Skrivanek"
> > > <mskrivan(a)redhat.com>, "engine-devel(a)ovirt.org"
> > > <devel(a)ovirt.org>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 10:42:35 AM
> > > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Push notifications in 4.0 backend
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > To: "Martin Betak" <mbetak(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: "engine-devel(a)ovirt.org" <devel(a)ovirt.org>,
"Piotr Kliczewski"
> > > > <pkliczew(a)redhat.com>, "Michal Skrivanek"
> > > > <mskrivan(a)redhat.com>
> > > > Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 6:22:45 PM
> > > > Subject: Re: [ovirt-devel] Push notifications in 4.0 backend
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Martin Betak" <mbetak(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > To: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > Cc: "Einav Cohen" <ecohen(a)redhat.com>,
"engine-devel(a)ovirt.org"
> > > > > <devel(a)ovirt.org>, "Roy Golan"
<rgolan(a)redhat.com>,
> > > > > "Roman Mohr" <rmohr(a)redhat.com>, "Michal
Skrivanek"
> > > > > <mskrivan(a)redhat.com>,
> > > > > "Piotr Kliczewski" <pkliczew(a)redhat.com>,
> > > > > "Tomas Jelinek" <tjelinek(a)redhat.com>,
"Alexander Wels"
> > > > > <awels(a)redhat.com>,
> > > > > "Greg Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>,
> > > > > "Scott Dickerson" <sdickers(a)redhat.com>,
"Arik Hadas"
> > > > > <ahadas(a)redhat.com>,
> > > > > "Allon Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com>,
> > > > > "Shmuel Melamud" <smelamud(a)redhat.com>,
"Jakub Niedermertl"
> > > > > <jniederm(a)redhat.com>, "Marek Libra"
> > > > > <mlibra(a)redhat.com>, "Martin Perina"
<mperina(a)redhat.com>,
"Alona
> > > > > Kaplan"
> > > > > <alkaplan(a)redhat.com>, "Martin Mucha"
> > > > > <mmucha(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2015 1:53:07 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: Push notifications in 4.0 backend
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi All,
> > > > >
> > > > > I have created a PoC patch [1] demonstrating the idea of
annotating
> > > > > basic CRUD commands to publish CDI events. It is not meant as
100%
> > > > > solution, but as a simplification of the common use cases when
> > > > > one would inject CDI event with given qualifier and fire it
after
> > > > > successful completion of transaction.
> > > >
> > > > The patches (mentioned below) look interesting.
> > > >
> > > > At this point, it would be great if backend core maintainers
> > > > voiced their opinions on the general idea of firing CDI events
> > > > in response to important actions happening on Engine, such as
> > > > backend commands being executed. So, what do you think guys?
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > I am for it, I think it may reduce load from our DB
> >
> > +1
> >
> The load reduction can be achieved and seems like not a big deal to
implement
> it.
> +1
Yes, the DB load reduction is perhaps the bigest boon of this effort :-).
This needs to be quantified.
As always, we need a cost-risk-benefit evaluation of a change, especially
for infra changes, since:
1. Infra changes are more likely to affect cross-teams, multiple features,
so the potential 'damage' to existing flows is not limited as in specific
feature changes.
2. If they are beneficial, we'll want/need more flows to be modified -
which adds more cost and risk (and hopefully, benefit!). If few flows
aren't changed, there's usually little value in making the change in the
first place. If only few flows are changed, unless they are critical, no
point in pushing the infra change too soon.
The events mechanism in VDSM<->engine is an example of a change that meets
this - and we haven't yet executed on item #2 above for it - not many flows
use it.
Mainly for risk and cost factors, as we do believe there is benefit in it.
Of course, such an effort has to be coordinated with the Infra team.
Y.
My first patch makes very convenient to fire notification from basic CRUD
management
operations that manipulate main business entities. The next (and probably
more
complicated) step will be a refactoring of the monitoring code to support
CDI
(injections and events) and have it fire events of VmDynamic payload. Then
on
the event we can have listening scheduler (balancing), HA, ... and other
parts
that not only won't have to issue expensive DB queries (e.g.
GetVmsRunningOnVds)
but also can be more decoupled from monitoring (e.g. VdsEventListener).
But this will be a little bit more involved than just annotating all CRUD
commands
with one annotation :-)
>
> > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The usage of this annotations is demonstrated on several basic
CRUD
> > > > > commands in [2] on StoragePool, VDS, VDSGroup, .etc
> > > > >
> > > > > As always, comments and suggestions are very welcome!
> > > > >
> > > > > Thank you and best regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Martin
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] infra:
https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/48696/
> > > > > [2] usage:
https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/48697/
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "Vojtech Szocs" <vszocs(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > To: "Martin Betak" <mbetak(a)redhat.com>,
"Einav Cohen"
> > > > > > <ecohen(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > Cc: "engine-devel(a)ovirt.org"
<devel(a)ovirt.org>, "Roy Golan"
> > > > > > <rgolan(a)redhat.com>, "Roman Mohr"
<rmohr(a)redhat.com>,
> > > > > > "Michal Skrivanek" <mskrivan(a)redhat.com>,
"Piotr Kliczewski"
> > > > > > <pkliczew(a)redhat.com>, "Tomas Jelinek"
> > > > > > <tjelinek(a)redhat.com>, "Alexander Wels"
<awels(a)redhat.com>,
"Greg
> > > > > > Sheremeta" <gshereme(a)redhat.com>, "Scott
> > > > > > Dickerson" <sdickers(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 9:31:45 PM
> > > > > > Subject: Re: Push notifications in 4.0 backend
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hi everyone,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > assuming that 4.0 UI will be based on the existing GWT
technology,
> > > > > > I'd like to improve two things which I believe are
very
important:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > #1 goal: improve GWT compilation times
> > > > > > - don't use standard GWT i18n mechanism which
yields
separate
> > > > > > permutation vector, but use our own i18n mechanism
instead
> > > > > > - in practice, compiling for X browsers and Y languages
should
> > > > > > result in GWT compiler processing X permutations (not
X *
Y)
> > > > > > - this will also directly impact GWT debug performance,
making
> > > > > > GWT debugging experience less painful for developers
> > > > > >
> > > > > > #2 goal: improve UX related to backend operations
> > > > > > - replace periodic polling with push notifications that
inform
> > > > > > UI of changes in oVirt "system" as they
happen
> > > > > > - in practice, UI becomes reactive instead of
proactive,
which
> > > > > > has several benefits (reduced HTTP load on Engine
being
the
> > > > > > most obvious one)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So what Martin wrote in email below directly relates to #2
goal.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Push notifications improve user experience regardless of
specific
> > > > > > UI technology, regardless of whether we improve existing
REST
API
> > > > > > (e.g. introduce data aggregations) or not.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > For me, it's a big +1.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Having BLL commands firing CDI events upon execution makes
sense.
> > > > > > That said, I'd suggest to start with a simple
implementation
and
> > > > > > proceed from there.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What Martin suggested:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > void onVmChanged(@Observes @Updated VM vm)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > could be even simplified into:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > void onCommandExecuted(@Observes @CommandExecuted
UpdateVmCommand
> > > > > > cmd)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > and still it would bring value to the general idea, which
is
the
> > > > > > ability to detect changes in oVirt "system" as
they happen
along
> > > > > > with the ability to react upon such changes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm interested what Engine backend maintainers'
thoughts are.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > Vojtech
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > From: "Martin Betak"
<mbetak(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > To: "engine-devel(a)ovirt.org"
<devel(a)ovirt.org>
> > > > > > > Cc: "Roy Golan" <rgolan(a)redhat.com>,
"Roman Mohr"
> > > > > > > <rmohr(a)redhat.com>,
> > > > > > > "Michal Skrivanek"
<mskrivan(a)redhat.com>,
> > > > > > > "Piotr Kliczewski"
<pkliczew(a)redhat.com>, "Vojtech Szocs"
> > > > > > > <vszocs(a)redhat.com>, "Tomas Jelinek"
<tjelinek(a)redhat.com>
> > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 4:34:11 PM
> > > > > > > Subject: Push notifications in 4.0 backend
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi All,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would like to take this opportunity to start a
discussion
> > > > > > > about the possibility of implementing a user facing
change
> > > > > > > notifications.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The benefit of this would be to remove the need for
periodic
> > > > > > > polling
> > > > > > > from frontends and other services that consume our
REST API.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Also implmenting a common infrastructure on the
backend for
event
> > > > > > > notifications (e.g. CDI events) would further reduce
the
internal
> > > > > > > need for polling the DB by the backend itself, maybe
even
> > > > > > > reducing
> > > > > > > the need to use DB for some things and just keep them
in
memory
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > updated by CDI event observers.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > There are many solutions how to provide the
user-facing part
of
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > notifications:
> > > > > > > Doctor Rest, MQTT, websocket, server-sent events, ...
.
Ideally
> > > > > > > these
> > > > > > > notifications
> > > > > > > should be consumable both by web browser
(webadmin/userportal)
> > > > > > > but
> > > > > > > also
> > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > other services (such as ManageIQ), or other REST
clients
such as
> > > > > > > moVirt
> > > > > > > android client.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But regardless of the chosen user-facing transport, I
believe a
> > > > > > > common
> > > > > > > infrastructure
> > > > > > > can be implemented on the BLL layer with the usage of
CDI
events
> > > > > > > fired
> > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > commands.
> > > > > > > I see 2 major sources of changes in the engine
(please
correct me
> > > > > > > if
> > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > wrong):
> > > > > > > 1) CRUD & management commands
> > > > > > > 2) Vms/Hosts monitoring
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > the changes originating from 2) are AFAIK very
localized and
not
> > > > > > > so
> > > > > > > numerous
> > > > > > > so a manual
> > > > > > > firing of appropriate events for VMs and Hosts could
be added
> > > > > > > here.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The 1) case is more extensive in terms of required
code
changes.
> > > > > > > While
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > manual solution
> > > > > > > would still be feasible, I believe there is place for
a more
> > > > > > > automated/declarative way.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > One solution for 1) that comes to my mind are simple
> > > > > > > command-level
> > > > > > > annotations covering the
> > > > > > > Created, Updated, Removed (C, U, and D from CRUD)
cases. The
goal
> > > > > > > here
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > fire the
> > > > > > > appropriate CDI events when an entity is
created/updated/deleted.
> > > > > > > Since
> > > > > > > commands usually
> > > > > > > contain getters for entities they work with (such as
getVm(),
> > > > > > > getVds(),
> > > > > > > getStorageDomain() ...)
> > > > > > > It should be sufficient for the most common simple
cases (of
> > > > > > > course
> > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > not cover
> > > > > > > everything) to use annotation @Creates, @Updates,
@Removes
on the
> > > > > > > commands
> > > > > > > classes, where
> > > > > > > parameters of the annotation should specify the getter
method
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > returns
> > > > > > > the affected entity
> > > > > > > (VM/VDS/StorageDomain...). This could be specified by
the
entity
> > > > > > > class
> > > > > > > token
> > > > > > > or method name
> > > > > > > (depending on the level of "magic" one
prefers :-) and the
> > > > > > > CommandBase
> > > > > > > infrastructure would
> > > > > > > then collect those annotations and upon successful
completion of
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > command
> > > > > > > fire the
> > > > > > > appropriate events.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Example #1:
> > > > > > > @Updates('getVm') // or @Updates(VM.class)?
> > > > > > > public class UpdateVmCommand<...> extends
VmManagementComandBase
> > > > > > > ...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Note that since Java 8 we have repeatable annotations
so we
can
> > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > more
> > > > > > > complex commands
> > > > > > > that affect more entities.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Example #2:
> > > > > > > @Updates(Vm.class)
> > > > > > > @Updates(VmTemplate.class)
> > > > > > > // possibly also some @Creates and @Removes
annotations or
their
> > > > > > > combination
> > > > > > > public class ContrivedExampleCommand extends
SomeCommandBase
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > the infrastructure would then look upon successful
completion of
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > command
> > > > > > > on the getVm()
> > > > > > > and getVmTemplate() methods, invoke them, determine
the
resulting
> > > > > > > types
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > entities VM and VmTemplate
> > > > > > > and since the annotations used were @Updates fire CDI
event
> > > > > > > equivalent
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > @Inject
> > > > > > > @Updated // our custom CDI qualifier
> > > > > > > Event<VM> vmChangedEvent;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > and anologously for VmTemplate.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But regardless of the exact implementation of the CDI
event
> > > > > > > firing:
> > > > > > > whether
> > > > > > > manual, the above
> > > > > > > proposal, or some crazy usage of AspectJ - the
interface for
the
> > > > > > > rest
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > code should always
> > > > > > > be the like this:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > public void onVmChanged(@Observes @Updated VM vm) {
> > > > > > > // ....
> > > > > > > }
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On top of this, I believe, we can build the
user-facing part
of
> > > > > > > push
> > > > > > > notifications and also
> > > > > > > improve our existing backend code.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thank you for reading this long email and I welcome
any
comments
> > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > counter-proposals you
> > > > > > > might have on this topic :-)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Martin
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Devel mailing list
> > > > Devel(a)ovirt.org
> > > >
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Devel mailing list
> > > Devel(a)ovirt.org
> > >
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Devel mailing list
> > Devel(a)ovirt.org
> >
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Devel mailing list
> Devel(a)ovirt.org
>
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel