[placement][nova][ptg] Resource provider - request group mapping

Chris Dent cdent+os at anticdent.org
Sun Apr 28 23:31:37 UTC 2019

On Sun, 21 Apr 2019, Jay Pipes wrote:

> In other words, the whole idea of placement -- including the addition of 
> hierachical and shared providers -- was to provide relief from the 
> free-for-all Wild West frontier that still exists in the Nova PCI manager, 
> hardware.py module, NUMATopologyFilter, and all that. It was supposed to 
> provide us a path out of that quagmire.
> I take it as a personal failure that we've yet to be able to take advantage 
> of the more consistent and structured data model in placement for these more 
> "advanced" resource classes :(

I think we can still do it, but we need to get our mental models
arranged and aligned. Thus my drive for some kind of universal
theory of nested operation. Some simple heuristics that make it
easy to map goals to processes to code.

Things that allow us to say "we could do it that way, but that
upsets the model".

One area where we seem to be running into problems a lot lately is
situations where people want to make requests to placement that are
explicit and specific about an instance of a type of thing, rather
than just the type of thing. Placement is oriented towards the
latter and while we could do that level of specificity it requires a
much more detailed awareness of the cloud across all the tools that
are involved than is ideal. If you already have that much awareness,
placement isn't really what you need: you already know the place.

Chris Dent                       ٩◔̯◔۶           https://anticdent.org/
freenode: cdent                                         tw: @anticdent

More information about the openstack-discuss mailing list