Open Stack

Hello, John Griffith,



Thank you very much for your funny mail. Now I see 2 "John G" ;)



I would like to say that TrippleO is the pioneer to handle the correlationship among the OpenStack instances. Cheer.



The problem domain for OpenStack cascading is multi-site / multi-vendor OpenStack instances integration. Based on this, the large scale cloud can be distributed in many data centers, and fault isolation / trouble shooting / configuration change / upgrade / patch /... can be done seperated by different OpenStack instance.



For example, a cloud includes 2 data center, vendor A sold their OpenStack solution in data center A, vendor B sold their OpenStack solution in data center B. If a criticle bug found in data center B, then the vendor B is reponsible for the bug fix and patch update. Clear duty responsiblity with independent OpenStack instances, even for the integration of software / hardware  .



Best Regards

Chaoyi Huang ( joehuang)



________________________________

From: John Griffith [john.griffith at solidfire.com]
Sent: 01 October 2014 0:10
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [all] [tc] Multi-clouds integration by OpenStack cascading



On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 7:35 AM, John Garbutt <john at johngarbutt.com<mailto:john at johngarbutt.com>> wrote:
On 30 September 2014 14:04, joehuang <joehuang at huawei.com<mailto:joehuang at huawei.com>> wrote:
> Hello, Dear TC and all,
>
> Large cloud operators prefer to deploy multiple OpenStack instances(as different zones), rather than a single monolithic OpenStack instance because of these reasons:
>
> 1) Multiple data centers distributed geographically;
> 2) Multi-vendor business policy;
> 3) Server nodes scale up modularized from 00's up to million;
> 4) Fault and maintenance isolation between zones (only REST interface);
>
> At the same time, they also want to integrate these OpenStack instances into one cloud. Instead of proprietary orchestration layer, they want to use standard OpenStack framework for Northbound API compatibility with HEAT/Horizon or other 3rd ecosystem apps.
>
> We call this pattern as "OpenStack Cascading", with proposal described by [1][2]. PoC live demo video can be found[3][4].
>
> Nova, Cinder, Neutron, Ceilometer and Glance (optional) are involved in the OpenStack cascading.
>
> Kindly ask for cross program design summit session to discuss OpenStack cascading and the contribution to Kilo.
>
> Kindly invite those who are interested in the OpenStack cascading to work together and contribute it to OpenStack.
>
> (I applied for “other projects” track [5], but it would be better to have a discussion as a formal cross program session, because many core programs are involved )
>
>
> [1] wiki: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_cascading_solution
> [2] PoC source code: https://github.com/stackforge/tricircle
> [3] Live demo video at YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSU6PYRz5qY
> [4] Live demo video at Youku (low quality, for those who can't access YouTube)：http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNzkzNDQ3MDg4.html
> [5] http://www.mail-archive.com/openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org/msg36395.html

There are etherpads for suggesting cross project sessions here:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Summit/Planning
https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-crossproject-summit-topics

I am interested at comparing this to Nova's cells concept:
http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/config-reference/content/section_compute-cells.html

Cells basically scales out a single datacenter region by aggregating
multiple child Nova installations with an API cell.

Each child cell can be tested in isolation, via its own API, before
joining it up to an API cell, that adds it into the region. Each cell
logically has its own database and message queue, which helps get more
independent failure domains. You can use cell level scheduling to
restrict people or types of instances to particular subsets of the
cloud, if required.

It doesn't attempt to aggregate between regions, they are kept
independent. Except, the usual assumption that you have a common
identity between all regions.

It also keeps a single Cinder, Glance, Neutron deployment per region.

It would be great to get some help hardening, testing, and building
out more of the cells vision. I suspect we may form a new Nova subteam
to trying and drive this work forward in kilo, if we can build up
enough people wanting to work on improving cells.

Thanks,
John

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

​Interesting idea, to be honest when TripleO was first announced what you have here is more along the lines of what I envisioned.  It seems that this would have some interesting wins in terms of upgrades, migrations and scaling in general.  Anyway, you should propose it to the etherpad as John G ( the other John G :) ) recommended, I'd love to dig deeper into this.

Thanks,
John​

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140930/7bf98073/attachment.html>