On 20 Jun 2016, at 18:41, Piotr Kliczewski <pkliczew@redhat.com> wrote:

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 6:22 PM, Nir Soffer <nsoffer@redhat.com> wrote:

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 11:33 AM, Martin Sivak <msivak@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.

bypassing vdsm for mom things is a good idea, but we need to make sure we’re not killing the rest of the system

Piotr, how far are we from letting mom listen to engine queue so it get engine
events/responses for certain verbs?

We can do it now for both events and responses. We need to remember that we would

receive anything that the engine is receiving. We could do better but that it would take

more time.

so it would receive all responses for only the defined verbs?

It would wok well for getAllVmStats

 

> 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.

and a lot of things stops working then;)

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?

I don’t think we should move any monitoring pulled from libvirt into mom - it would need another expensive and problematic call

It can be used now but the engine needs to know to listen for them. We would

need to implement engine subscriber (one class).

 

> 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@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

_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
Devel@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel