[openstack-dev] 答复: Proposal for approving Auto HA development blueprint.
GLIKSON at il.ibm.com
Tue Aug 13 06:33:58 UTC 2013
Agree. Some enhancements to Nova might be still required (e.g., to handle
resource reservations, so that there is enough capacity), but the
end-to-end framework probably should be outside of existing services,
probably talking to Nova, Ceilometer and potentially other components
(maybe Cinder, Neutron, Ironic), and 'orchestrating' failure detection,
fencing and recovery.
Probably worth a discussion at the upcoming summit.
From: Konglingxian <konglingxian at huawei.com>
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List
<openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>,
Date: 13/08/2013 07:07 AM
Subject: [openstack-dev] 答复: Proposal for approving Auto HA
Your idea is good, but I think the auto HA operation is not OpenStack’s
business. IMO, Ceilometer offers ‘monitoring’, Nova offers ‘evacuation’,
and you can combine them to realize HA operation.
So, I’m afraid I can’t understand the specific implementation details very
Any different opinions?
发件人: yongiman at gmail.com [mailto:yongiman at gmail.com]
发送时间: 2013年8月12日 20:52
收件人: openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org
主题: Re: [openstack-dev] Proposal for approving Auto HA development
Now, I am developing auto ha operation for vm high availability.
This function is all progress automatically.
It needs other service like ceilometer.
ceilometer monitors compute nodes.
When ceilometer detects broken compute node, it send a api call to Nova,
nova exposes for auto ha API.
When received auto ha call, nova progress auto ha operation.
All auto ha enabled VM where are running on broken host are all migrated
to auto ha Host which is extra compute node for using only Auto-HA
Below is my blueprint and wiki page.
Wiki page is not yet completed. Now I am adding lots of information for
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev