Open Stack

Hi,

As it was also stated in 
http://www.stillhq.com/openstack/juno/000012.html, we expect to finish 
the prerequisites for Scheduler split by Juno. That requires to merge 
two blueprints, one with the spec validated but patches still under 
review [1] and one with the spec still subject to debates [2]


During this cycle, we discussed a lot how to update Scheduler with 
Compute Node stats, and the proposal we made (with a +2 on the spec) was 
to make use of Extensible Resource Tracker [3] to make that work easily 
without having to create new DB or Objects fields.

That said, it seems Extensible Resource Tracker (ERT) is still subject 
to discussions [4], where a revert change has been proposed [5]

I can understand the concerns raised by that, but that's unfortunate 
that we discuss if ERT is good or not by 1 week before Feature Proposal 
Freeze, which will happen this Thursday. Indeed, while the changes have 
been proposed now some weeks ago, it requires to create new patches by 2 
days in order to remove ERT as a dependency from the patches. IIUC, 
removing ERT means, with the concern of scheduler split, to create a new 
DB compute_node field and a new ComputeNode Object attribute for each 
resource (aggregate, instance, flavor) related to the host : that will 
generate more work and while the interface will be quite good (one field 
for one type), it will have huge payload (one ComputeNode version more, 
migrations etc.)

In that condition, I can't hardly see how we can reach the target of 
merging all the bits by Juno. That's why I'm coming back to you, 
Nova-ists, to know your opinion and what kind of things you would like.


Yeah, I know that's life and life can be hard, but I'm just advocating 
advices for getting all of your attention.


-Sylvain


[1] https://review.openstack.org/82778 and 
https://review.openstack.org/104556
[2] 
https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+topic:bp/isolate-scheduler-db,n,z
[3] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109643/
[4] 
http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-August/042709.html
[5] https://review.openstack.org/115218