[ovs-dev] weekly OVN report

[Russell Bryant]

On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Russell Bryant <russell at ovn.org> wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 11:40 PM, Dan Mihai Dumitriu <dmd17 at cornell.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> I'd argue for the approach of keeping the OVSDB protocol in place,
>> because the SB schema is already there, well understood, and making the
>> central DB a fault tolerant cluster would have little or no impact on the
>> ovs-controller implementation. It would also allow the current single OVSDB
>> to continue to function while the cluster is developed.
>>
>
Do you also mean keep ovsdb-server, or did you mean writing a server-side
OVSDB-to-other-db proxy?

I was thinking that if we wanted to add support for another db, doing it
with a client side abstraction would be better instead of adding our own
custom server-side component.

-- 
Russell Bryant