Open Stack

Guys,

I've read comments from JoshNang here
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/IronicPythonAgent. And it looks like we
are still not on the same page about architecture of agent. I'd like us to
avoid having hard coded logic in agent at all. If we need, then let's
implement it as a driver. I mean it would be great to have all pieces of
functionality as and only as drivers exposed via REST.

For example, I have simple granular drivers, let say "power state" driver
and "disk setup" driver and I'd like it to be possible to call them
independently (granularly) outside of any kind of flow, outside of
"prepare" or "deploy" or any other stages. There is no reason to put
granular actions inside "deploy" or "prepare" stages w/o exposing them
directly via REST.

On the other hand, we obviously need to have flows (sequences of granular
tasks), but I'd like to see them implemented as drivers as well. We can
have canned flows (hard coded sequences like "prepare" and "deploy") as
well as fully data driven generic flow driver. And we obviously need to get
rid of "modes" so as to have just a plain bunch of drivers which are able
to call their neighbors if necessary.

Below are some examples of canned flow, generic flow and granular drivers:

Canned flow driver url:  /prepare
Data: {"key1": "value1", ...}
Implementation:
def flow(data):
  ext_mgr.map(lambda ext: ext.name == "raid_config", lambda ext:
ext.obj(data))
  ext_mgr.map(lambda ext: ext.name == "deploy", lambda ext: ext.obj(data))
  ....

Canned flow driver url: /deploy
Data: {"key11": "value11", ...}
....

Generic flow driver url: /flow
Data: [
{"driver": "prepare", "data": {"key1": "value1", ...}},
{"driver": "deploy", "data": {"key11": "value11", ...}},
{"driver": "power", "data": "reboot"}
]
Implemetation:
def flow(data):
  for d in data:
     ext_mgr.map(lambda ext: ext.name == d["driver"], lambda ext:
ext.obj(d))


Granual driver driver: /power
Data: {"key111": "value111", ...}
Implementation:
ext_mgr.map(lambda ext: ext.name == "power", lambda ext: ext.obj(data))

What do you guys think of having just plain (not tree like) bunch of
drivers?


Vladimir Kozhukalov


On Mon, Mar 10, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Ryan Petrello
<ryan.petrello at dreamhost.com>wrote:

> FYI, the API scaffolding isn't actually released yet, though I'm planning
> on making a pecan release with this in the next week or two.
>
> ---
> Ryan Petrello
> Senior Developer, DreamHost
> ryan.petrello at dreamhost.com
>
> On Mar 9, 2014, at 12:10 PM, Devananda van der Veen <
> devananda.vdv at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > For those looking at Pecan/WSME'fying the agent, some scaffolding was
> recently added to Pecan which may interest you.
> >
> > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/78682/
> >
> >
> > -Deva
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140321/3efcc2cd/attachment.html>