Open Stack

Alex Glikson <GLIKSON at il.ibm.com> wrote on 09/29/2013 03:30:35 PM:

> Mike Spreitzer <mspreitz at us.ibm.com> wrote on 29/09/2013 08:02:00 PM:
> 
> > Another reason to prefer host is that we have other resources to 
> > locate besides compute. 
> 
> Good point. Another approach (not necessarily contradicting) could 
> be to specify the location as a property of host aggregate rather 
> than individual hosts (and introduce similar notion in Cinder, and 
> maybe Neutron). This could be an evolution/generalization of the 
> existing 'availability zone' attribute, which would specify a more 
> fine-grained location path (e.g., 
> 'az_A:rack_R1:chassis_C2:node_N3'). We briefly discussed this 
> approach at the previous summit (see 'simple implementation' under 
> https://etherpad.openstack.org/HavanaTopologyAwarePlacement) -- but 
> unfortunately I don't think we made much progress with the actual 
> implementation in Havana (would be good to fix this in Icehouse). 

Thanks for the background.  I can still see the etherpad, but the old 
summit proposal to which it points is gone.

The etherpad proposes an API, and leaves open the question of whether it 
backs onto a common service.  I think that is a key question.  In my own 
group's work, this sort of information is maintained in a shared database. 
 I'm not sure what is the right approach for OpenStack.

Thanks,
Mike
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20130930/77a6a3e5/attachment.html>