<font size=2 face="sans-serif">Do not worry about what I want, right now
I am just trying to understand the Climate proposal, wrt virtual resources
(Patrick helped a lot on the physical side). Can you please walk
through a scenario involving Climate reservations on virtual resources?
I mean from start to finish, outlining which party makes which decision,
based on what.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Thanks,</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Mike</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">From:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Sylvain Bauza <sylvain.bauza@bull.net></font>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">To:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">OpenStack Development
Mailing List <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>, </font>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Cc:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Mike Spreitzer/Watson/IBM@IBMUS</font>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Date:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">10/07/2013 05:07 AM</font>
<br><font size=1 color=#5f5f5f face="sans-serif">Subject:
</font><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Re: [openstack-dev]
[Climate] Questions and comments</font>
<br>
<hr noshade>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=3>Hi Mike,<br>
<br>
Dina and you outlined some differences in terms of seeing what is dependent
on what. <br>
As Dina explained, Climate plans to be integrated into Nova and Heat logics,
where Heat and Nova would request Climate API by asking for a lease and
would tag on their own the resources as 'RESERVED'.<br>
On your point, and correct me if I'm wrong, you would rather see Climate
on top of Heat and Nova, scheduling resources on its own, and only send
creation requests to Heat and Nova. <br>
<br>
I'm happy to say both of you are right : Climate aims to be both called
by Nova and *also* calling Nova. That's just matter of what Climate *is*.
And here is the confusion.<br>
<br>
That's why Climate is not only one API endpoint. It actually have two distinct
endpoints : one called the Lease API endpoint, and one called the Resource
Reservation API endpoint.<br>
<br>
As a Climate developer working on physical hosts reservations (and not
Heat stacks), my concern is to be able to guarantee to a REST client (either
a user or another service) that if this user wants to provision X hosts
on a specific timeframe in the future (immediate or in 10 years), Climate
will be able to provision them. By meaning "being able" and "guarantee",
I do use strong words for stating that we engage ourselves to be able to
plan what will be resources capacity state in the future.<br>
<br>
This decision-making process (ie. this "Climate scheduler") will
be implemented as RPC Service for the Reservation API, and thus will needs
to keep its own persistence layer in Climate. Of course, it will request
the Lease API for really creating the lease and managing lease start/end
hooks, that's the Lease API job.<br>
<br>
<br>
Provided you would want to use the Reservation API for "reserving"
Heat stacks, you would have to implement it tho.<br>
<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
-Sylvain<br>
<br>
Le 06/10/2013 20:41, Mike Spreitzer a écrit :</font>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Thanks, Dina. Yes, we do not understand
each other; can I ask some more questions?</font><font size=3> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
You outlined a two-step reservation process ("</font><font size=3>We
assume the following reservation process for the OpenStack services</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif">..."),
and right after that talked about changing your mind to use Heat instead
of individual services. So I am confused, I am not sure which of
your remarks reflect your current thinking and which reflect old thinking.
Can you just state your current thinking?</font><font size=3> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
On what basis would Climate decide to start or stop a lease? What
sort of event notifications would Climate be sending, and when and why,
and what would subscribers do upon receipt of such notifications?</font><font size=3>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
If the individual resource services continue to make independent scheduling
decisions as they do today, what value does Climate add?</font><font size=3>
<br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Maybe a little more detailed outline of what happens in your current thinking,
in support of an explicitly stated use case that shows the value, would
help here.</font><font size=3> <br>
</font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Thanks,</font><font size=3> </font><font size=2 face="sans-serif"><br>
Mike</font><font size=3> <br>
</font>
<br><tt><font size=3>_________________
_________________________
_____<br>
OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
</font></tt><a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org"><tt><font size=3 color=blue><u>OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org</u></font></tt></a><tt><font size=3><br>
</font></tt><a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev"><tt><font size=3 color=blue><u>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</u></font></tt></a><tt><font size
=3><br>
</font></tt>
<br>
<br>