Open Stack

Hi Alex,

My understanding is that the 17th is the deadline and that Russell needs to be planning the sessions from that point onwards.  If we delay in giving him our suggestions until the 22nd I think it would be too late.    We've had weeks if not months now of discussing possible scheduler sessions, I really don't see why we can't deliver a recommendation on how best to fit into the 3 committed slots on or before the 17th.

Phil

On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 10:56 AM, Alex Glikson <GLIKSON at il.ibm.com> wrote:
> IMO, the three themes make sense, but I would suggest waiting until 
> the submission deadline and discuss at the following IRC meeting on the 22nd.
> Maybe there will be more relevant proposals to consider.
>
> Regards,
> Alex
>
> P.S. I plan to submit a proposal regarding scheduling policies, and 
> maybe one more related to theme #1 below
>
>
>
> From:        "Day, Phil" <philip.day at hp.com>
> To:        OpenStack Development Mailing List
> <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>,
> Date:        14/10/2013 06:50 PM
> Subject:        Re: [openstack-dev] Scheduler meeting and Icehouse Summit
> ________________________________
>
>
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> In the weekly scheduler meeting we've been trying to pull together a 
> consolidated list of Summit sessions so that we can find logical 
> groupings and make a more structured set of sessions for the limited 
> time available at the summit.
>
> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/IceHouse-Nova-Scheduler-Sessions
>
> With the deadline for sessions being this Thursday 17th, tomorrows IRC 
> meeting is the last chance to decide which sessions we want to combine /
> prioritize.    Russell has indicated that a starting assumption of three
> scheduler sessions is reasonable, with any extras depending on what 
> else is submitted.
>
> I've matched the list on the Either pad to submitted sessions below, 
> and added links to any other proposed sessions that look like they are related.
>
>
> 1) Instance Group Model and API
>                        Session Proposal:
> http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/190
>
> 2) Smart Resource Placement:
>                   Session Proposal:
> http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/33
>                        Possibly related sessions:                  Resource
> optimization service for nova  
> (http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/201)
>
> 3) Heat and Scheduling and Software, Oh My!:
>                 Session Proposal:
> http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/113
>
> 4) Generic Scheduler Metrics and Celiometer:
>                 Session Proposal:
> http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/218
>                 Possibly related sessions:  Making Ceilometer and Nova 
> play nice  http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/73
>
> 5) Image Properties and Host Capabilities
>                 Session Proposal:  NONE
>
> 6) Scheduler Performance:
>                 Session Proposal:  NONE
>                 Possibly related Sessions: Rethinking Scheduler Design
> http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/34
>
> 7) Scheduling Across Services:
>                 Session Proposal: NONE
>
> 8) Private Clouds:
>                 Session Proposal:
> http://summit.openstack.org/cfp/details/228
>
> 9) Multiple Scheduler Policies:
>                 Session Proposal: NONE
>
>
> The proposal from last weeks meeting was to use the three slots for:
>                 - Instance Group Model and API   (1)
>                 - Smart Resource Placement (2)
>                 - Performance (6)
>
> However, at the moment there doesn't seem to be a session proposed to 
> cover the performance work ?
>
> It also seems to me that the Group Model and Smart Placement are 
> pretty closely linked along with (3) (which says it wants to combine 1 
> & 2 into the same topic) , so if we only have three slots available then these look like
> logical candidates for consolidating into a single session.    That would
> free up a session to cover the generic metrics (4) and Ceilometer - 
> where a lot of work in Havana stalled because we couldn't get a 
> consensus on the way forward.  The third slot would be kept for 
> performance - which based on the lively debate in the scheduler meetings I'm assuming will still be submitted
> as a session.    Private Clouds isn't really a scheduler topic, so I suggest
> it takes its chances as a general session.  Hence my revised proposal 
> for the three slots is:
>
>  i) Group Scheduling / Smart Placement / Heat and Scheduling  (1), 
> (2), (3), & (7)
>                 - How do you schedule something more complex that a 
> single VM ?
>
> ii) Generalized scheduling metrics / celiometer integration (4)
>                 - How do we extend the set of resources a scheduler 
> can use to make its decisions ?
>                 - How do we make this work with  / compatible with 
> Celiometer ?
>
> iii) Scheduler Performance (6)
>
> In that way we will at least give airtime to all of the topics.     If a 4th
> scheduler slot becomes available then we could break up the first 
> session into two parts.
>
> Thoughts welcome here or in tomorrows IRC meeting.
>
> Cheers,
> Phil
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>



--
-Debo~

_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev