Open Stack

Hi, Loy,

+100. Really interesting topic. 

Cascading[1] has holistic thinking on the question list, and one cross project topic is just submitted yesterday:
 
>>a) Any other value for partitioning besides scalability? e.g. fault domain isolation, heterogeneous integration...

Sure, each cascaded OpenStack(Nova,Cinder,Neutron,Ceilometer,Glance..) as one fault domain isolation, and can integrate different back-end ( hypervisor, storage,SDN controller, data-plane... ) in different cascaded OpenStack.

>>b) Which projects need partitioning besides Nova?
>>Cidner/Neutron/Ceilometer/Glance/Keystone?

Nova,Cinder,Neutron,Ceilometer need partitioning, Glance is optional, and KeyStone can be shared service or federated service.

>>c) Standalone partition design and deploy for each project, or some collaboration is need across them?  e.g. Can a host belong to one Nova partition and another Cinder partition?

Collaboration is required across these projects. Just think about the availability zone concept in Cinder and Nova, currently there is no mandatory relationship for the AZ concept between Nova and Cinder. If you deploy Ceph like server-SAN as storage backend, it's rather weird that compute-node in one AZ, but the server-san built upon these nodes in another AZ. They must be coordinated with each other.   

>>d) Concept clarifying and instructions on different partition granularity, e.g. Cell, Available Zone, Aggregator...
Currently Cells concept only inside Nova. Availability Zone only in Nova and Cinder, Aggregator is a concept only in Nova too. 
It seems that only Cascading has holistic thinking in the OpenStack as a whole. 

>>e) Interface choice between parent and child partitions, internal RPC or external REST, or some other protocols?
Cascading using external RESTful API (i.e current OpenStack API), the benefit is to ease maintenance for each partitioning, and different version partitioning integration. 

====== Cross Project Session =========

I just applied one cross-project session topic to talk about the portioning through OpenStack cascading, the session title is " Technical vision for OpenStack to be ubiquitous cloud service". Why I use this title? For I want to introduce the holistic vision and cascading first, then we have a basis to discuss the partitioning. If there is other session to discuss the partitioning, it's also ok.

[1]OpenStack cascading: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/OpenStack_cascading_solution

Best Regards
Chaoyi Huang ( Joe Huang )


-----Original Message-----
From: loy wolfe [mailto:loywolfe at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 9:33 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: [openstack-dev] [all] [cross-project] Any Openstack partitioning movements in this summit?

Hi,

Nova cell has emerged for several release cycles, with the mission of scalability. Now there are claims of Neutron cell. Maybe similar Cinder/Ceilometer partition demands would appear in the future.

So I wander if cross-project Openstack partitioning would go into the our sight in the near term, with the following topics for example:

a) Any other value for partitioning besides scalability? e.g. fault domain isolation, heterogeneous integration...
b) Which projects need partitioning besides Nova?
Cidner/Neutron/Ceilometer/Glance/Keystone?
c) Standalone partition design and deploy for each project, or some collaboration is need across them?  e.g. Can a host belong to one Nova partition and another Cinder partition?
d) Concept clarifying and instructions on different partition granularity, e.g. Cell, Available Zone, Aggregator...
e) Interface choice between parent and child partitions, internal RPC or external REST, or some other protocols?


Best Regards

__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev