incubator-libcloud mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jerry Chen <>
Subject Re: [libcloud] libcloud roadmap and plans for the future
Date Mon, 07 Feb 2011 15:04:12 GMT

On Feb 7, 2011, at 8:48 AM, Tomaz Muraus wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 4:57 AM, Jed Smith <> wrote:
>> At the risk of sounding dense, how does asynchronous benefit the
>> library as a whole? It seems like a (potential) benefit for storage,
>> but not compute.
> Even though most of the actions are by nature blocking, this doesn't mean
> that all of our users are using the library in a blocking way as well.
> Currently, if you want to launch multiple number of nodes or, for example,
> you are constantly polling for node status on multiple accounts, you need to
> wait for a previous call to return or use something like threading which is
> in most cases less than ideal.

As long as the abstraction doesn't create weird race conditions, nor forces us to modify each
driver for async stuff to work, I would be okay with this capability. I just can't wrap my
head around how one would test for correctness and stability.

> And yes, like you have already pointed out, this can be particularly useful
> when the storage part is in place.
> I know that the development of the Storage part has started just recently,
> but my thread was more about the  long term plans for libcloud and not
> necessary about something which needs be developed as soon as possible.
> In the end, it would be nice to hear how most of our users are currently
> using libcloud and if asynchronous API would benefit them.

I agree. Speak up, people!

BTW, I started up a wish list on the wiki a while back:

I'm not convinced it has the best voting mechanism (it acts like a IRC topic vote!) but at
least we can get an idea of the weighting.

View raw message