<div dir="ltr">Thanks Alex for your detailed inspection of my work. Comments inline..<div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 3 February 2015 at 21:32, Alexandre Levine <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:alevine@cloudscaling.com" target="_blank">alevine@cloudscaling.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
I'm writing this in regard to several reviews concering tagging
functionality for EC2 API in nova.<br>
The list of the reviews concerned is here:<br>
<pre><a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bp/ec2-volume-and-snapshot-tags,n,z" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/nova+branch:master+topic:bp/ec2-volume-and-snapshot-tags,n,z</a>
</pre>
I don't think it's a good idea to merge these reviews. The analysis
is below:<br>
<br>
<b>Tagging in AWS</b><br>
<br>
Main goal for the tagging functionality in AWS is to be able to
efficiently distinguish various resources based on user-defined
criteria:<br>
<br>
<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:verdana,arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">"Tags enable you to categorize your AWS
resources in different ways, for example, by purpose, owner, or
environment.<span> <br>
...</span></span><br>
<span style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:verdana,arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px;float:none;display:inline!important">You can search and filter the resources
based on the tags you add."<br>
<br>
(quoted from here: <a href="http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/Using_Tags.html" target="_blank">http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/Using_Tags.html</a>)<br>
</span><br>
It means that one of the two main use-cases is to be able to use
Tags as filter when you describe something. Another one is to be
able to get information about particular tag with all of the
resources tagged by it.<br>
Also there is a constraint:<br>
<p style="font-family:verdana,arial,sans-serif;font-size:12px;color:rgb(0,0,0);margin-bottom:1em;font-style:normal;font-variant:normal;font-weight:normal;letter-spacing:normal;line-height:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;white-space:normal;word-spacing:0px">"You
can tag public or shared resources, but the tags you assign are
available only to your AWS account and not to the other accounts
sharing the resource."</p>
The important part here is "shared resources" which are visible to
different users but tags are not shared - each user sees his own.<br>
<b><br>
</b><b>Existing implementation in nova<br>
<br>
</b>Existing implementation of tags in nova's EC2 API covers only
instances. But it does so in both areas:<br>
1. Tags management (create, delete, describe,...)<br>
2. Instances filtering (describe_instances with filtering by tags).<br>
The implementation is based on storing tags in each instance's
metadata. And nova DB sqlalchemy level uses "tag:" in queries to
allow instances describing with tag filters.<br>
<br>
I see the following design flaws in existing implementation:<br>
<br>
1. It uses instance's own metadata for storing information about
assigned tags.<br>
Problems:<br>
- it doesn't scale when you want to start using tags for other
resources. Following this design decision you'll have to store tags
in other resources metadata, which mean different services APIs and
other databases. So performance for searching for tags or tagged
resources in main use cases should suffer. You'll have to search
through several remote APIs, querying different metadatas to collect
all info and then to compile the result.<br>
- instances are not shared resources, but images are. It means that,
when developed, metadata for images will have to store different
tags for different users somehow.<br>
<br>
2. EC2-specific code ("tag:" searching in novaDB sqlalchemy) leaked
into lower layers of nova.<br>
- layering is violated. There should be no EC2-specifics below EC2
API library in nova, ideally.<br></div></blockquote><div>All of the Nova-EC2 mapping happens in Nova's DB currently. See InstanceIdMapping model in nova/db/sqlalchemy/models.py. EC2 API which resides in Nova will keep using the Nova database as long as it is functional.</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
- each other service will have to implement the same solution in its
own DB level to support tagging for EC2 API.<br>
<br>
<b>Proposed review changes</b><b><br>
</b><br>
The review in question introduces tagging for volumes and snapshots.
It follows design decisions of existing instance tagging
implementation, but realizes only one of the two use cases. It
provides "create", "delete", "describe" for tags. But it doesn't
provide describe_volumes or describe_snapshots for filtering.<br></div></blockquote><div>I honestly forgot about those two methods. I can implement them. </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
It suffers from the design flaws I listed above. It has to query
remote API (cinder) for metadata. It didn't implement filtering by
"tag:" in cinder DB level so we don't see implementation of
describe_volumes with tags filtering.<br></div></blockquote><div>Cinder do support filtering based on tags, and I marked the work as TODO in <a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/112325/23/nova/volume/cinder.py">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/112325/23/nova/volume/cinder.py</a> . This was not the reason why I didn't implement describe_volumes and describe_snapshots. Those two methods just missed my attention :)</div><div><br></div><div>Nova's EC2 API's tag filtering is also done in-memory presently if I'm correct, as Nova's API doesn't support filtering only on the basis of tag names or tag values alone..</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<b>Current stackforge/ec2-api tagging implementation</b><b><br>
<br>
</b>In comparison, the implementation of tagging in
stackforge/ec2-api, stores all of the tags and their links to
resources and users in a separate place. So we can efficiently list
tags and its resources or filter by tags during describing of some
of the resources. Also user-specific tagging is supported.<br>
<br>
<b>Conclusion<br>
<br>
</b>Keeping in mind all of the above, and seeing your discussion
about deprecation of EC2 API in nova, I don't feel it's a good time
to add such a half-baked code with some potential problems into
nova.<b><br>
</b>I think it's better to concentrate on cleaning up, fixing,
reviving and making bullet-proof whatever functionality is currently
present in nova for EC2 and used by clients.<br></div></blockquote><div>EC2 API already shares database with Nova's, so the tight coupling between EC2 API and Nova's database is not going to go away till the time EC2 API server/controller is present in Nova. Nova instance metadata is being used as EC2 instance tags, and what the above-referenced spec is doing is is very similar: Cinder volume metadata is being used as EC2 volume tags, and similarly for volume snapshots. I don't see a difference between instances and volumes and volume snapshots in the sense that they all are non-share-able (yet).</div><div><br></div><div>I completely understand that these patches look like feature additions. I started working on them first in January 2014 ( <a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64690/">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/64690/</a> ), and at that time it was just a sincere effort to improve EC2 API using the first possible way I could find out. Since we have not deprecated the in-Nova EC2 support yet, and we are yet to reach a concrete plan to move forward, I am tempted to ask for allowing this patch to be considered for review..</div><div><br></div><div>I am fine if people think these patches shouldn't be allowed to go in. I can only wish that the patches got more attention when it was possible to get them merged :)</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Rushi Agrawal</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
Best regards,<br>
Alex Levine<br>
<br>
</div>
<br>__________________________________________________________________________<br>
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)<br>
Unsubscribe: <a href="http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe" target="_blank">OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>