[almighty] Multitenancy
Andrew Lee Rubinger
alr at redhat.com
Tue Sep 27 14:04:16 UTC 2016
On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 9:57 AM, Monica Granfield <mgranfie at redhat.com>
wrote:
> Thanks all. Yes, persisted work! Great. Transactions... I know ACID is not
> a priority just putting it out there for consideration while creating the
> infrastructure...
>
Totally. And in our case I would actually argue that ACID is not only not
a priority, it's a poor design decision for work items. Updates to work
items aren't, from what I can tell, mission critical enough to warrant the
resources and synchronization points involved.
S,
ALR
>
> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 9:30 AM, Andrew Lee Rubinger <alr at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I think we're intermingling concepts. :)
>>
>> To circle this back to multitenancy: yes, anytime a work item is
>> persisted/updated, it should be available to all users system-wide.
>>
>> Transactional integrity does not appear to be a requirement from PM, so
>> something eventually-consistent will do. This means that we take an
>> optimistic approach to subsequent updates and prioritize performance over
>> ACID compliance.
>>
>> Whether that change is pushed to the UI or simply available at the next
>> request is out-of-scope for 6-months requirements from PM.
>>
>> S,
>> ALR
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Todd Mancini <tmancini at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I think the only requirement for real-time update is Chat, and,
>>> technically, Chat is not part of the 6 month plan (although we are working
>>> on it).
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Monica Granfield <mgranfie at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> How about user status, comments.. any transactions that you would
>>>> expect to be live or immediate,...Low Pri so long as we account for it,
>>>> sounds good to me.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 9:04 AM, Todd Mancini <tmancini at redhat.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> My $0.02.
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. When we say 'status change', we need to be careful. If I have a WI
>>>>> open for full details and I change basically anything, nothing is persisted
>>>>> until I click Save. (This gives me the option to cancel.) But in other
>>>>> parts of the UI, say, moving a card on a Kanban board from 1 column to
>>>>> another -- that would be an immediate update. I'm not saying anyone is
>>>>> confused by this, but it never hurts to restate it. :)
>>>>> 2. All WIs have a Status as far as I know, so I don't think we need to
>>>>> talk about "WIs with a status", because that suggests that some do not.
>>>>> 3. Auto-updating UIs when someone/something changes something -- in
>>>>> general, sure, this is nice to have (say, via WebSockets). But I would call
>>>>> this out as low priority for our first release.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Todd
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:41 AM, Monica Granfield <mgranfie at redhat.com
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Sure... if a WI has a status, and the status changes, will it
>>>>>> immediately persist and be updated anywhere that WI is viewed. In the past
>>>>>> I have run into scenarios about concurrency with objects based on how
>>>>>> multi-tenancy is structured. So just want to ask if all data is live or
>>>>>> will require updates to see current statuses, states or otherwise...?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 7:08 PM, Andrew Lee Rubinger <alr at redhat.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sep 26, 2016 5:01 PM, "Monica Granfield" <mgranfie at redhat.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > One scenario to ask about here... around keeping status in sync
>>>>>>> with multi-tenants.... Is this something that is good or has been thought
>>>>>>> about at all?..
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I am not sure I understand the question, Monica. Could you
>>>>>>> elaborate?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > -Monica
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> > On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 5:30 AM, Max Rydahl Andersen <
>>>>>>> manderse at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> On 23 Sep 2016, at 0:44, Andrew Lee Rubinger wrote:
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>> I think the question is about more than a URL scheme.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> We've been considering "Project" as our top-level container
>>>>>>> entity, but
>>>>>>> >>> there really exists "system" above that.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> By that measure, we can contain in a system:
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> * Users
>>>>>>> >>> * Projects
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> ...and then map permissions between users and roles at the
>>>>>>> project level.
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> How does "Organization" map into that?
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> Good points and I like the notion of "system".
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> The way GitHub and I think VSO does it is that Organizations are
>>>>>>> owners/containers of projects and users can also be owners.
>>>>>>> >> Which is why they often share namespace, i.e. cannot have both a
>>>>>>> user and org called "maxandersen".
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> /max
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> S,
>>>>>>> >>> ALR
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 6:37 PM, Todd Mancini <
>>>>>>> tmancini at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>>> It's not clear to me what URLs have to do with multi-tenancy.
>>>>>>> The VSTS
>>>>>>> >>>> approach (which is actually one "org" per FQDN, but with
>>>>>>> infinite
>>>>>>> >>>> projects per org) was chosen for technical reasons, not product
>>>>>>> >>>> management ones.
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> So, do you have a technical preference?
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> The GitHub model seems to work well. But since we also plan to
>>>>>>> handle
>>>>>>> >>>> enterprise SSO (via SAML, for example), the Gmail model also
>>>>>>> works well
>>>>>>> >>>> (as far as PM is concerned). I'm not married to particular URL
>>>>>>> schemes.
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> Sent from my phone, so anticipate hilarious autocorrectsFrom:
>>>>>>> Max
>>>>>>> >>>> Rydahl Andersen
>>>>>>> >>>> Sent: 9/22/2016 6:24 PM
>>>>>>> >>>> To: Andrew Lee Rubinger
>>>>>>> >>>> Cc: ALMighty-public
>>>>>>> >>>> Subject: Re: [almighty] Multitenancy
>>>>>>> >>>> On 22 Sep 2016, at 21:08, Andrew Lee Rubinger wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 3:07 PM, Baiju Muthukadan
>>>>>>> >>>>> <bmuthuka at redhat.com>
>>>>>>> >>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> ALMighty architecture is going to support Multitenancy, right?
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> To the bone, yes.
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> what is unclear though is how the multi tenancy will work.
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> i.e. is it like github/jira where one instance under one url
>>>>>>> has many
>>>>>>> >>>> projects with shared users/orgs
>>>>>>> >>>> or is it more like VSO where each domain has one project with
>>>>>>> users
>>>>>>> >>>> shared across many domains.
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> Eagerly waiting for some of the "new project" PDD/UX stories to
>>>>>>> actually
>>>>>>> >>>> start getting that settled down.
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> /max
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> >>>>>> Baiju M
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> >>>>>> almighty-public mailing list
>>>>>>> >>>>>> almighty-public at redhat.com
>>>>>>> >>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/almighty-public
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> --
>>>>>>> >>>>> Red Hat Developer Programs Architecture
>>>>>>> >>>>> @ALRubinger
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> >>>>> almighty-public mailing list
>>>>>>> >>>>> almighty-public at redhat.com
>>>>>>> >>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/almighty-public
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> /max
>>>>>>> >>>> http://about.me/maxandersen
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> >>>> almighty-public mailing list
>>>>>>> >>>> almighty-public at redhat.com
>>>>>>> >>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/almighty-public
>>>>>>> >>>>
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> --
>>>>>>> >>> Red Hat Developer Programs Architecture
>>>>>>> >>> @ALRubinger
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> /max
>>>>>>> >> http://about.me/maxandersen
>>>>>>> >>
>>>>>>> >> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> >> almighty-public mailing list
>>>>>>> >> almighty-public at redhat.com
>>>>>>> >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/almighty-public
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> almighty-public mailing list
>>>>>> almighty-public at redhat.com
>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/almighty-public
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Red Hat Developer Programs Architecture
>> @ALRubinger
>>
>
>
--
Red Hat Developer Programs Architecture
@ALRubinger
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/almighty-public/attachments/20160927/7d8046cf/attachment.htm>
More information about the almighty-public
mailing list