Date
1 - 20 of 53
[VOTE] Vitess project proposal (incubation)
|
Joseph Jacks <jacks.joe@...>
+1 non-binding
|
|
|
|
Camille Fournier
Thanks for indulging my last minute questions. +1 binding On Jan 30, 2018 8:05 PM, "Junghyun Kim" <kjh@...> wrote: +1 (non-binding) |
|
|
|
Junghyun Kim <kjh@...>
+1 (non-binding)
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 08:50 am, Chris Aniszczyk wrote: ase vote (+1/0/-1) on this thread... remember that the TOC h |
|
|
|
Mark Peek
+1 non-binding
From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@...>
The TOC has decided to invite Vitess (https://github.com/youtube/vitess)
as an INCUBATION level CNCF project, sponsored by Brian Grant from the TOC. _._,_._,_ |
|
|
|
Jonathan Boulle <jon@...>
+1 binding On 30 January 2018 at 06:14, Sugu Sougoumarane <ssougou@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Sugu Sougoumarane
Many of these companies have talked to us, and we are still in some form of conversation with some of them. The logos we've listed are only those from whom we've received explicit permission from. PS: mineraftly is an aweseom find! LOL. PPS: I missed Nozzle's contribution in my original response. Ironically, they are the most noteworthy contributors because they're refactoring our helm charts. On 29 January 2018 at 21:04, Brian Grant via Lists.Cncf.Io <briangrant=google.com@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Brian Grant
FWIW, it looks like there is decent demand for something like Vitess (13790 commits) based on the number of companies that have implemented their own solutions:
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 8:03 PM, Brian Grant via Lists.Cncf.Io <briangrant=google.com@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Ken Owens
+1 Binding On Mon, Jan 29, 2018, 7:23 PM Bryan Cantrill <bryan@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Brian Grant
There's even Minecraft on Vitess :-) On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 7:28 PM, Brian Grant via Lists.Cncf.Io <briangrant=google.com@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Brian Grant
To follow up on this, with some links for external confirmation: I think some of the confusion arose due to data being sampled at different times. The original presentation to the TOC was last April, for instance. Slack presentation from 4-5 months ago. They are contributing heavily to vitess, as can be seen from the contribution stats I just sent, and even a small fraction of traffic was non-trivial. Stichlabs has fully migrated production to Vitess: video. BetterCloud mentions that they use Vitess on their blog. IMO, the production usage bar is intended primarily to assess maturity and production-worthiness, and secondarily general applicability (though 3 users isn't really enough for that). I don't think maturity and production-worthiness are concerns in this case. I think better documenting production usage via case studies is something the CNCF could help with. As with Prometheus, Envoy, and Jaegar, Vitess was developed over the last 7 years or so for Youtube's own use. It has become more relevant to other companies with the (comparatively recent) emergence of Kubernetes. If we're looking for more user-initiated projects, Vitess is one of those. On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 6:41 PM, Sugu Sougoumarane <ssougou@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Brian Grant
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 5:54 PM, Camille Fournier <skamille@...> wrote:
Committers from multiple organizations is part of the graduation criteria, not incubation criteria: That said, growth of non-Google contributors was a concern of mine a year ago, but the situation has changed significantly over the past 9-12 months. The last 4-5 months: The top contributor (170 commits, which is a decent number) was from Slack, as was the 3rd-largest contributor. Also in the top 10 were contributors from Hubspot, Github, and Nozzle.
|
|
|
|
Quinton Hoole
Thanks Sugu.
That answers my question.
+1 (non-binding).
Q
From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Sugu Sougoumarane <ssougou@...>
Reply-To: "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...> Date: Monday, January 29, 2018 at 18:41 To: "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...> Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Vitess project proposal (incubation)
|
|
|
|
Bryan Beaudreault <bbeaudreault@...>
Hi guys,
I'm an engineer at HubSpot who was part of the decision to adopt vitess over a year ago and have contributed to the project both internally and externally. In that time we have committed numerous features and improvements, and moved along a careful process of evaluation followed by bringing Vitess to production. As Sugu said, we have multiple full time employees working on Vitess, all of which have committed code to Vitess. In terms of our architecture, we operate microservices at HubSpot, and follow a typical pattern of different microservices getting their own database. We have over 200 separate database clusters of various sizes, each with a QA and production footprint. For the platform teams at HubSpot QA is effectively production, as we have a separate test environment where we stage changes (in total: staging, qa, then prod). Understandably, the definition of production usage should be based on actual customer usage. We have had nearly 100% of QA migrated for months now, and started the prod migration in the last month or so. At this time we have 5 production database clusters migrated to Vitess. That is a small percentage of the total, but these are real applications, powering services used by real HubSpot customers, and we treat prod as mission critical. We will be continuing the prod rollout for a few months, but we are well past the evaluation phase. At this point we are fully committed to vitess, with production users, support staff, and active development. Hope that helps. Bryan |
|
|
|
Sugu Sougoumarane
Ah, I should have made this explicit in our slides, but here is the information to address your concerns about the graduation criteria: The following eight companies have vitess serving production traffic:
Of these, engineers from the following companies have made significant contributions to the vitess code base:
Additionally, the following companies have started making contributions, while in the process of evaluating:
There are also other companies listed in the adopters page. They are evaluating vitess with the intent to mainly use it. Finally, there are other companies, who are involved with Vitess at various levels, that wish to remain anonymous. So, we haven’t listed them here. Please let me know if this answers your questions, or if you have others. On 29 January 2018 at 18:08, Quinton Hoole <quinton.hoole@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Quinton Hoole
I share Camille’s concern.
Note that the only explicit requirement in this regard w.r.t. Incubation level is as follows (from https://www.cncf.io/projects/graduation-criteria/):
The proposal says this about adopters:
This is an alphabetical list of known adopters of Vitess. Some have already gone into production, and others are at various stages of testing. Can we perhaps get some clarification about which are in
production, and which are still in testing.
Sorry, this should have been brought up in the due diligence, but
unfortunately got missed, by the looks of things.
Q
Quinton Hoole Technical Vice President America Research Center 2330 Central Expressway, Santa Clara, CA 95050 Tel: 408-330-4721 Cell: 408-320-8917 Office # E2-9 Email: quinton.hoole@... ID#Q00403160
From: <cncf-toc@...> on behalf of Camille Fournier <skamille@...>
Reply-To: "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...> Date: Monday, January 29, 2018 at 17:54 To: "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...> Subject: Re: [cncf-toc] [VOTE] Vitess project proposal (incubation)
|
|
|
|
Camille Fournier
Basically, I'm concerned that there are not really actual production users who also are project committers that aren't YouTube/Google. On Jan 29, 2018 9:53 PM, "Camille Fournier" <skamille@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Camille Fournier
But it is not yet in prod? Bringing it to prod sounds like not. On Jan 29, 2018 9:51 PM, "Sugu Sougoumarane" <ssougou@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Sugu Sougoumarane
Just got this confirmation from Hubspot: "Definitely using. Two dedicated full timers working on bringing it to prod. Three others supporting part time, plus me. We have a handful of prod clusters at this point and are starting wider scale rollout soon." It's likely that the slides were prepared at different times, because they were on staging for a while. On 29 January 2018 at 17:36, Camille Fournier <skamille@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Camille Fournier
I'm confused, is hubspot using or evaluating this product? The different slide decks seem to disagree. On Jan 25, 2018 12:50 PM, "Chris Aniszczyk" <caniszczyk@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Bryan Cantrill <bryan@...>
- Bryan On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 8:50 AM, Chris Aniszczyk <caniszczyk@linuxfoundation.
|
|
|
