Open Stack

Hi Yathiraj and Tim,

Really appreciate your comments here ;-)

I will prepare some detailed slides or documents before summit and we can
have a review then. It would be great if OpenStack can provide "DRS"
features.

Thanks,

Jay



2014-03-01 6:00 GMT+08:00 Tim Hinrichs <thinrichs at vmware.com>:

> Hi Jay,
>
> I think the Solver Scheduler is a better fit for your needs than Congress
> because you know what kinds of constraints and enforcement you want.  I'm
> not sure this topic deserves an entire design session--maybe just talking a
> bit at the summit would suffice (I *think* I'll be attending).
>
> Tim
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> | From: "Jay Lau" <jay.lau.513 at gmail.com>
> | To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
> openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> | Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 6:30:54 PM
> | Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack][Runtime Policy] A proposal for
> OpenStack run time policy to manage
> | compute/storage resource
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> |
> | Hi Tim,
> |
> | I'm not sure if we can put resource monitor and adjust to
> | solver-scheduler (Gantt), but I have proposed this to Gantt design
> | [1], you can refer to [1] and search "jay-lau-513".
> |
> | IMHO, Congress does monitoring and also take actions, but the actions
> | seems mainly for adjusting single VM network or storage. It did not
> | consider migrating VM according to hypervisor load.
> |
> | Not sure if this topic deserved to be a design session for the coming
> | summit, but I will try to propose.
> |
> |
> |
> |
> | [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/icehouse-external-scheduler
> |
> |
> |
> | Thanks,
> |
> |
> | Jay
> |
> |
> |
> | 2014-02-27 1:48 GMT+08:00 Tim Hinrichs < thinrichs at vmware.com > :
> |
> |
> | Hi Jay and Sylvain,
> |
> | The solver-scheduler sounds like a good fit to me as well. It clearly
> | provisions resources in accordance with policy. Does it monitor
> | those resources and adjust them if the system falls out of
> | compliance with the policy?
> |
> | I mentioned Congress for two reasons. (i) It does monitoring. (ii)
> | There was mention of compute, networking, and storage, and I
> | couldn't tell if the idea was for policy that spans OS components or
> | not. Congress was designed for policies spanning OS components.
> |
> |
> | Tim
> |
> | ----- Original Message -----
> |
> | | From: "Jay Lau" < jay.lau.513 at gmail.com >
> | | To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
> | | < openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org >
> |
> |
> | | Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 10:13:14 PM
> | | Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack][Runtime Policy] A proposal
> | | for OpenStack run time policy to manage
> | | compute/storage resource
> | |
> | |
> | |
> | |
> | |
> | | Thanks Sylvain and Tim for the great sharing.
> | |
> | | @Tim, I also go through with Congress and have the same feeling
> | | with
> | | Sylvai, it is likely that Congress is doing something simliar with
> | | Gantt providing a holistic way for deploying. What I want to do is
> | | to provide some functions which is very similar with VMWare DRS
> | | that
> | | can do some adaptive scheduling automatically.
> | |
> | | @Sylvain, can you please show more detail for what "Pets vs.
> | | Cattles
> | | analogy" means?
> | |
> | |
> | |
> | |
> | | 2014-02-26 9:11 GMT+08:00 Sylvain Bauza < sylvain.bauza at gmail.com >
> | | :
> | |
> | |
> | |
> | | Hi Tim,
> | |
> | |
> | | As per I'm reading your design document, it sounds more likely
> | | related to something like Solver Scheduler subteam is trying to
> | | focus on, ie. intelligent agnostic resources placement on an
> | | holistic way [1]
> | | IIRC, Jay is more likely talking about adaptive scheduling
> | | decisions
> | | based on feedback with potential counter-measures that can be done
> | | for decreasing load and preserving QoS of nodes.
> | |
> | |
> | | That said, maybe I'm wrong ?
> | |
> | |
> | | [1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/solver-scheduler
> | |
> | |
> | |
> | | 2014-02-26 1:09 GMT+01:00 Tim Hinrichs < thinrichs at vmware.com > :
> | |
> | |
> | |
> | |
> | | Hi Jay,
> | |
> | | The Congress project aims to handle something similar to your use
> | | cases. I just sent a note to the ML with a Congress status update
> | | with the tag [Congress]. It includes links to our design docs. Let
> | | me know if you have trouble finding it or want to follow up.
> | |
> | | Tim
> | |
> | |
> | |
> | | ----- Original Message -----
> | | | From: "Sylvain Bauza" < sylvain.bauza at gmail.com >
> | | | To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
> | | | questions)"
> | | | < openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org >
> | | | Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 3:58:07 PM
> | | | Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack][Runtime Policy] A
> | | | proposal
> | | | for OpenStack run time policy to manage
> | | | compute/storage resource
> | | |
> | | |
> | | |
> | | | Hi Jay,
> | | |
> | | |
> | | | Currently, the Nova scheduler only acts upon user request (either
> | | | live migration or boot an instance). IMHO, that's something Gantt
> | | | should scope later on (or at least there could be some space
> | | | within
> | | | the Scheduler) so that Scheduler would be responsible for
> | | | managing
> | | | resources on a dynamic way.
> | | |
> | | |
> | | | I'm thinking of the Pets vs. Cattles analogy, and I definitely
> | | | think
> | | | that Compute resources could be treated like Pets, provided the
> | | | Scheduler does a move.
> | | |
> | | |
> | | | -Sylvain
> | | |
> | | |
> | | |
> | | | 2014-02-26 0:40 GMT+01:00 Jay Lau < jay.lau.513 at gmail.com > :
> | | |
> | | |
> | | |
> | | |
> | | | Greetings,
> | | |
> | | |
> | | | Here I want to bring up an old topic here and want to get some
> | | | input
> | | | from you experts.
> | | |
> | | |
> | | | Currently in nova and cinder, we only have some initial placement
> | | | polices to help customer deploy VM instance or create volume
> | | | storage
> | | | to a specified host, but after the VM or the volume was created,
> | | | there was no policy to monitor the hypervisors or the storage
> | | | servers to take some actions in the following case:
> | | |
> | | |
> | | | 1) Load Balance Policy: If the load of one server is too heavy,
> | | | then
> | | | probably we need to migrate some VMs from high load servers to
> | | | some
> | | | idle servers automatically to make sure the system resource usage
> | | | can be balanced.
> | | |
> | | | 2) HA Policy: If one server get down for some hardware failure or
> | | | whatever reasons, there is no policy to make sure the VMs can be
> | | | evacuated or live migrated (Make sure migrate the VM before
> | | | server
> | | | goes down) to other available servers to make sure customer
> | | | applications will not be affect too much.
> | | |
> | | | 3) Energy Saving Policy: If a single host load is lower than
> | | | configured threshold, then low down the frequency of the CPU to
> | | | save
> | | | energy; otherwise, increase the CPU frequency. If the average
> | | | load
> | | | is lower than configured threshold, then shutdown some
> | | | hypervisors
> | | | to save energy; otherwise, power on some hypervisors to load
> | | | balance. Before power off a hypervisor host, the energy policy
> | | | need
> | | | to live migrate all VMs on the hypervisor to other available
> | | | hypervisors; After Power on a hypervisor host, the Load Balance
> | | | Policy will help live migrate some VMs to the new powered
> | | | hypervisor.
> | | |
> | | | 4) Customized Policy: Customer can also define some customized
> | | | policies based on their specified requirement.
> | | |
> | | | 5) Some run-time policies for block storage or even network.
> | | |
> | | |
> | | |
> | | | I borrow the idea from VMWare DRS (Thanks VMWare DRS), and there
> | | | indeed many customers want such features.
> | | |
> | | |
> | | |
> | | | I have filed a bp here [1] long ago, but after some discussion
> | | | with
> | | | Russell, we think that this should not belong to nova but other
> | | | projects. Till now, I did not find a good place where we can put
> | | | this in, can any of you show some comments?
> | | |
> | | |
> | | |
> | | | [1]
> | | |
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/resource-optimization-service
> | | |
> | | | --
> | | |
> | | |
> | | | Thanks,
> | | |
> | | | Jay
> | | |
> | | | _______________________________________________
> | | | OpenStack-dev mailing list
> | | | OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> | | | http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> | | |
> | | |
> | | |
> | | | _______________________________________________
> | | | OpenStack-dev mailing list
> | | | OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> | | |
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev&k=oIvRg1%2BdGAgOoM1BIlLLqw%3D%3D%0A&r=%2FZ35AkRhp2kCW4Q3MPeE%2BxY2bqaf%2FKm29ZfiqAKXxeo%3D%0A&m=XDB3hT4WE2iDrNVK0sQ8qKooX2r1T4E%2BVHek3GREhnE%3D%0A&s=e2346cd017c9d8108c12a101892492e2ac75953e4a5ea5c17394c775cf086d7f
> | |
> | |
> | | |
> | |
> | | _______________________________________________
> | | OpenStack-dev mailing list
> | | OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> | | http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> | |
> | |
> | | _______________________________________________
> | | OpenStack-dev mailing list
> | | OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> | | http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> | |
> | |
> | |
> | |
> | | --
> | |
> | |
> | | Thanks,
> | |
> | | Jay
> | |
> | | _______________________________________________
> | | OpenStack-dev mailing list
> | | OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> | |
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev&k=oIvRg1%2BdGAgOoM1BIlLLqw%3D%3D%0A&r=%2FZ35AkRhp2kCW4Q3MPeE%2BxY2bqaf%2FKm29ZfiqAKXxeo%3D%0A&m=E45fhmBClHHPExheGdRk0z%2Bj72gQAP4Zc1W3XElJx60%3D%0A&s=684cee6930f5d74f56e1ab9fc42e5f3c2511f07948f357040ca2dc175c4ccee6
> |
> |
> | |
> |
> | _______________________________________________
> | OpenStack-dev mailing list
> | OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> | http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> |
> |
> |
> | --
> |
> |
> | Thanks,
> |
> | Jay
> |
> | _______________________________________________
> | OpenStack-dev mailing list
> | OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> |
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev&k=oIvRg1%2BdGAgOoM1BIlLLqw%3D%3D%0A&r=%2FZ35AkRhp2kCW4Q3MPeE%2BxY2bqaf%2FKm29ZfiqAKXxeo%3D%0A&m=oXtNDrtlvCX0d%2BN7rnJXx5e3YjkX%2FGQHVTRP%2BN7hKrw%3D%0A&s=40f6f376ab93e166f327385661db38cf88ca6f2563fbc003cd94d81bf596f9c4
> |
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>



-- 
Thanks,

Jay
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140301/df4f1f49/attachment.html>