[openstack-dev] [nova] Stein PTG summary
sbauza at redhat.com
Thu Sep 27 10:23:43 UTC 2018
On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 2:46 AM Matt Riedemann <mriedemos at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9/26/2018 5:30 PM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
> > So, during this day, we also discussed about NUMA affinity and we said
> > that we could possibly use nested resource providers for NUMA cells in
> > Stein, but given we don't have yet a specific Placement API query, NUMA
> > affinity should still be using the NUMATopologyFilter.
> > That said, when looking about how to use this filter for vGPUs, it looks
> > to me that I'd need to provide a new version for the NUMACell object and
> > modify the virt.hardware module. Are we also accepting this (given it's
> > a temporary question), or should we need to wait for the Placement API
> > support ?
> > Folks, what are you thoughts ?
> I'm pretty sure we've said several times already that modeling NUMA in
> Placement is not something for which we're holding up the extraction.
It's not an extraction question. Just about knowing whether the Nova folks
would accept us to modify some o.vo object and module just for a temporary
time until Placement API has some new query parameter.
Whether Placement is extracted or not isn't really the problem, it's more
about the time it will take for this query parameter ("numbered request
groups to be in the same subtree") to be implemented in the Placement API.
The real problem we have with vGPUs is that if we don't have NUMA affinity,
the performance would be around 10% less for vGPUs (if the pGPU isn't on
the same NUMA cell than the pCPU). Not sure large operators would accept
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev