Open Stack

Hi Russell,
Thanks for replying,


2014-03-12 16:46 GMT+01:00 Russell Bryant <rbryant at redhat.com>:

> On 03/12/2014 07:35 AM, Dina Belova wrote:
> > Thanks TC for spending time on Blazar (ex. Climate, in process of
> > renaming) discussion!
> >
> > It was decided that potentially reservation idea is interesting for OS
> > and it'll be great to have cross-project session on ongoing Atlanta
> > Summit and discuss future of reservation/scheduling management in
> OpenStack.
> >
> > Here is link to cross-project session proposal:
> >
> > http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/45
> >
> > Thanks everyone and let's keep working on that idea.
>
> Yes, I do think it would be useful to discuss this in person.  However,
> I don't think that was the most important feedback from the TC meeting.
>
> The biggest concern seemed to be that we weren't sure whether Climate
> makes sense as an independent project or not.  We think it may make more
> sense to integrate what Climate does today into Nova directly.  More
> generally, we think reservations of resources may best belong in the
> APIs responsible for managing those resources, similar to how quota
> management for resources lives in the resource APIs.
>
> There is some expectation that this type of functionality will extend
> beyond Nova, but for that we could look at creating a shared library of
> code to ease implementing this sort of thing in each API that needs it.
>


That's really a good question, so maybe I could give some feedback on how
we deal with the existing use-cases.
About the possible integration with Nova, that's already something we did
for the virtual instances use-case, thanks to an API extension responsible
for checking if a scheduler hint called 'reservation' was spent, and if so,
take use of the python-climateclient package to send a request to Climate.

I truly agree with the fact that possibly users should not use a separate
API for reserving resources, but that would be worth duty for the project
itself (Nova, Cinder or even Heat). That said, we think that there is need
for having a global ordonancer managing resources and not siloing the
resources. Hence that's why we still think there is still a need for a
Climate Manager.

Once I said that, there are different ways to plug in with the Manager, our
proposal is to deliver a REST API and a python client so that there could
be still some operator access for managing the resources if needed. The
other way would be to only expose an RPC interface like the scheduler does
at the moment but as the move to Pecan/WSME is already close to be done
(reviews currently in progress), that's still a good opportunity for
leveraging the existing bits of code.

-Sylvain
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140312/0fd4910d/attachment.html>