Open Stack

Zane Bitter <zbitter at redhat.com> wrote on 09/27/2013 08:24:49 AM:

> Your diagrams clearly show scheduling happening in a separate stage to 
> (infrastructure) orchestration, which is to say that at the point where 
> resources are scheduled, their actual creation is in the *future*.
> 
> I am not a Climate expert, but it seems to me that they have a 
> near-identical problem to solve: how do they integrate with Heat such 
> that somebody who has reserved resources in the past can actually create 

> them (a) as part of a Heat stack or (b) as standalone resources, at the 
> user's option. IMO OpenStack should solve this problem only once.

If I understand correctly, what Climate adds to the party is planning 
allocations to happen at some specific time in the non-immediate future. A 
holistic infrastructure scheduler is planning allocations to happen just 
as soon as we can get the plans through the relevant code path, which is 
why I describe it as "now".


> If I understood your remarks correctly, we agree that there is no 
> (known) reason that the scheduling has to occur in the middle of 
> orchestration (which would have implied that it needed to be 
> incorporated in some sense into Heat).

If you agree that by orchestration you meant specifically infrastructure 
orchestration then we are agreed.  If software orchestration is also in 
the picture then I also agree that holistic infrastructure scheduling does 
not *have to* go in between software orchestration and infrastructure 
orchestration --- but I think that's a pretty good place for it.


> Right, so what I'm saying is that if all those things are _stated_ in 
> the input then there's no need to run the orchestration engine to find 
> out what they'll be; they're already stated.

Yep.

Thanks,
Mike
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20130927/e56d4720/attachment.html>