On 04/09/2019 12:51 PM, Dmitry Tantsur wrote:
On 4/8/19 6:16 PM, Chris Dent wrote:
From the etherpad [1]
* blazar * cinder * cyborg * ironic * neutron
Who else?
This is a bit of a catch-many topic. Despite being birthed in Nova, Placement is designed to be useful to lots of different services.
There's already some time defined at the PTG to talk about the interaction of Ironic, Blazar, and Placement.
What are the issues with that?
From ironic perspective there is no issue, but there is a critical question to decide: when Ironic+Placement is used, which of them acts as the final authority? If Ironic, then we need to teach Placement to talk to its Allocation API when allocating a bare metal node. If Placement, then we need to support Allocation API talking to Placement. I suspect the latter is saner, but I'd like to hear more opinions.
Ironic (scheduler?) would request candidates from the placement service using the GET /allocation_candidates API. Ironic (scheduler?) would then claim the resources on a provider (a baremetal node) by calling the POST /allocations API.
In both cases we'll need something that syncs nodes from Ironic to Placement when there is no Compute to do it.
Yep, this is absolutely correct. My advice: don't bother copying any code from the nova-compute resource tracker. It's horrible. Best, -jay
What are the issues other services are experiencing with Placement? Preventing people from using Placement?
What services are using Placement and the team doesn't know about it?