Open Stack

On 28/10/14 22:18 +0000, Jesse Cook wrote:
>
>
>On 10/27/14, 6:08 PM, "Jay Pipes" <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On 10/27/2014 06:18 PM, Jesse Cook wrote:
>>> In the glance mini-summit there was a request for some documentation on
>>> the architecture ideas I was discussing relating to: 1) removing data
>>> consistency as a concern for glance 2) bootstraping vs baking VMs
>>>
>>> Here's a rough draft:
>>>https://gist.github.com/CrashenX/8fc6d42ffc154ae0682b
>>
>>Hi Jesse!
>>
>>A few questions for you, since I wasn't at the mini-summit and I think
>>don't have a lot of the context necessary here...
>>
>>1) In the High-Level Architecture diagram, I see Glance Middleware
>>components calling to a "Router" component. Could you elaborate what
>>this Router component is, in relation to what components currently exist
>>in Glance and Nova? For instance, is the Router kind of like the
>>existing Glance Registry component? Or is it something more like the
>>nova.image.download modules in Nova? Or something entirely different?
>
>It's a high-level abstraction. It's close to being equivalent to the cloud
>icon you find in many architecture diagrams, but not quite that vague. If
>I had to associate it with an existing OpenStack component, I'd probably
>say nova-scheduler. There is much detail to be flushed out here. I have
>some additional thoughts and documentation that I'm working on that I will
>share once it is more flushed out. Ultimately, I would like to see a fully
>documented prescriptive architecture that we can iterate over to address
>some of the complexities and pain points within the system as a whole.
>
>>
>>2) The Glance Middleware. Do you mean WSGI middleware here? Or are you
>>referring to something more like the existing nova.image.api module that
>>serves as a shim over the Glance server communication?
>
>At the risk of having something thrown at me, what I am suggesting is a
>move away from Glance as a service to Glance as a purely functional API.
>At some point caching would need to be discussed, but I am intentionally
>neglecting caching and the existence of any data store as there is a risk
>of complecting state. I want to avoid discussions on performance until
>more important things can be addressed such as predictability,
>reliability, scalability, consistency, maintainability, extensibility,
>security, and simplicity (i.e. As defined by Rich Hickey).
>

Hi Jessee,

I, unfortunately, missed your presentation at the virtual mini summit
so I'm trying to catch up and to understand what you're proposing.

As far as I understand, your proposal is to hide Glance from public
access and just make it consumable by other services like Nova,
Cinder, etc through a, perhaps more robust, glance library. Did I
understand correctly?

Or, are you suggesting to get rid of glance's API entirely and instead
have it in the form of a library and everything would be handled by
the middleware you have in your diagram?

Cheers,
Flavio

-- 
@flaper87
Flavio Percoco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20141031/0d8504e6/attachment.pgp>