<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi Mike and Zane,<br>
<br>
Le 27/09/2013 15:58, Mike Spreitzer a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:OF7C2021B1.BDBBD7E2-ON85257BF3.004C1B84-85257BF3.004CBFC3@us.ibm.com"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
<tt><font size="2">Zane Bitter <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:zbitter@redhat.com"><zbitter@redhat.com></a> wrote on
09/27/2013
08:24:49 AM:<br>
<br>
> Your diagrams clearly show scheduling happening in a
separate stage
to <br>
> (infrastructure) orchestration, which is to say that at
the point
where <br>
> resources are scheduled, their actual creation is in the
*future*.<br>
> <br>
> I am not a Climate expert, but it seems to me that they
have a <br>
> near-identical problem to solve: how do they integrate
with Heat such
<br>
> that somebody who has reserved resources in the past can
actually
create <br>
> them (a) as part of a Heat stack or (b) as standalone
resources, at
the <br>
> user's option. IMO OpenStack should solve this problem
only once.</font></tt>
<br>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">If I understand correctly, what Climate adds to
the
party is planning allocations to happen at some specific time
in the non-immediate
future. A holistic infrastructure scheduler is planning
allocations
to happen just as soon as we can get the plans through the
relevant code
path, which is why I describe it as "now".</font></tt>
<br>
<tt><font size="2"><br>
</font></tt></blockquote>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">Cl<font size="2">imate <font size="2">is wide-s<font
size="2">cope<font size="2">d aiming <font size="2">to <font
size="2">e<font size="2">xc<font size="2">lusively
reserve any kind of resou<font size="2">rces by
a certain time. This gene<font size="2">ric
sentence doesn't mean Climate ca<font
size="2">n't <font size="2">schedule
things <font size="2">'now<font
size="2">'<font size="2"> : you can
ask for an immediate lease
(starting <font size="2">'now<font
size="2">')</font></font> and
<font size="2">you<font size="2">
will <font size="2">get the
resources as of now<font
size="2">.<font size="2"><br>
<font size="2"><br>
<font size="2"><font
size="2">Climate <font
size="2">team is
actually split <font
size="2">i<font
size="2">nto t<font
size="2">wo
different
teams, one
focusin<font
size="2">g on
hardware
procurement
and one
focusing of
virtual p<font
size="2">rocurement.
I can't spe<font
size="2">ak on
<font size="2">behalf
of the <font
size="2">'Climate
Virtual' team</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font>,
but I would bet <font
size="2">scheduling
<font size="2">an
Heat stack or a<font
size="2"> S<font
size="2">avan<font
size="2">na c<font
size="2">luster
will require
some kind of
holis<font
size="2">tic D<font
size="2">SL,
indeed.<br>
<br>
<font size="2">From
the 'Climate P<font
size="2">h<font
size="2">ysical</font></font></font>'
<font size="2">POV,
that could
even be
necessary, but<font
size="2"> yet<font
size="2">
unclear a<font
size="2">t the
moment.<br>
<br>
<font size="2">-Sylvain</font><br>
</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font><br>
</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></tt>
<blockquote
cite="mid:OF7C2021B1.BDBBD7E2-ON85257BF3.004C1B84-85257BF3.004CBFC3@us.ibm.com"
type="cite"><tt><font size="2">
<br>
> If I understood your remarks correctly, we agree that
there is no
<br>
> (known) reason that the scheduling has to occur in the
middle of <br>
> orchestration (which would have implied that it needed to
be <br>
> incorporated in some sense into Heat).</font></tt>
<br>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">If you agree that by orchestration you meant
specifically
infrastructure orchestration then we are agreed. If software
orchestration
is also in the picture then I also agree that holistic
infrastructure scheduling
does not *have to* go in between software orchestration and
infrastructure
orchestration --- but I think that's a pretty good place for
it.</font></tt>
<br>
<br>
<tt><font size="2"><br>
> Right, so what I'm saying is that if all those things are
_stated_
in <br>
> the input then there's no need to run the orchestration
engine to
find <br>
> out what they'll be; they're already stated.<br>
</font></tt>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">Yep.</font></tt>
<br>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">Thanks,</font></tt>
<br>
<tt><font size="2">Mike</font></tt>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org">OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>