[openstack-dev] [magnum][bp] Power Magnum to run on metal withHyper
Kai Qiang Wu
wkqwu at cn.ibm.com
Mon Jul 20 02:00:04 UTC 2015
Hi Peng,
As @Adrian pointed it out:
My fist suggestion is to find a way to make a nova virt driver for Hyper,
which could allow it to be used with all of our current Bay types in
Magnum.
I remembered you or other guys in your company proposed one bp about nova
virt driver for Hyper. What's the status of the bp now?
Is it accepted by nova projects or cancelled ?
Thanks
Best Wishes,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kai Qiang Wu (吴开强 Kennan）
IBM China System and Technology Lab, Beijing
E-mail: wkqwu at cn.ibm.com
Tel: 86-10-82451647
Address: Building 28(Ring Building), ZhongGuanCun Software Park,
No.8 Dong Bei Wang West Road, Haidian District Beijing P.R.China
100193
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Follow your heart. You are miracle!
From: Adrian Otto <adrian.otto at rackspace.com>
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
<openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Date: 07/19/2015 11:18 PM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][bp] Power Magnum to run on
metal withHyper
Peng,
You are not the first to think this way, and it's one of the reasons we did
not integrate Containers with OpenStack in a meaningful way a full year
earlier. Please pay attention closely.
1) OpenStack's key influences care about two personas: 1.1) Cloud Operators
1.2) Cloud Consumers. If you only think in terms of 1.2, then your idea
will get killed. Operators matter.
2) Cloud Operators need a consistent way to bill for the IaaS services the
provide. Nova emits all of the RPC messages needed to do this. Having a
second nova that does this slightly differently is a really annoying
problem that will make Operators hate the software. It's better to use
nova, have things work consistently, and plug in virt drivers to it.
3) Creation of a host is only part of the problem. That's the easy part.
Nova also does a bunch of other things too. For example, say you want to
live migrate a guest from one host to another. There is already
functionality in Nova for doing that.
4) Resources need to be capacity managed. We call this scheduling. Nova has
a pluggable scheduler to help with the placement of guests on hosts. Magnum
will not.
5) Hosts in a cloud need to integrate with a number of other services, such
as an image service, messaging, networking, storage, etc. If you only think
in terms of host creation, and do something without nova, then you need to
re-integrate with all of these things.
Now, I probably left out examples of lots of other things that Nova does.
What I have mentioned us enough to make my point that there are a lot of
things that Magnum is intentionally NOT doing that we expect to get from
Nova, and I will block all code that gratuitously duplicates functionality
that I believe belongs in Nova. I promised our community I would not
duplicate existing functionality without a very good reason, and I will
keep that promise.
Let's find a good way to fit Hyper with OpenStack in a way that best
leverages what exists today, and is least likely to be rejected. Please
note that the proposal needs to be changed from where it is today to
achieve this fit.
My fist suggestion is to find a way to make a nova virt driver for Hyper,
which could allow it to be used with all of our current Bay types in
Magnum.
Thanks,
Adrian
-------- Original message --------
From: Peng Zhao <peng at hyper.sh>
Date: 07/19/2015 5:36 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
<openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][bp] Power Magnum to run on metal
withHyper
Thanks Jay.
Hongbin, yes, it will be a scheduling system, either swarm, k8s or mesos. I
just think bay isn't a must in this case, and we don't need nova to
provision BM hosts, which makes things more complicated imo.
Peng
------------------ Original ------------------
From: "Jay Lau"<jay.lau.513 at gmail.com>;
Date: Sun, Jul 19, 2015 10:36 AM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
questions)"<openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>;
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][bp] Power Magnum to run on metal
withHyper
Hong Bin,
I have some online discussion with Peng, seems hyper is now integrating
with Kubernetes and also have plan integrate with mesos for scheduling.
Once mesos integration finished, we can treat mesos+hyper as another kind
of bay.
Thanks
2015-07-19 4:15 GMT+08:00 Hongbin Lu <hongbin.lu at huawei.com>:
Peng,
Several questions Here. You mentioned that HyperStack is a single big
“bay”. Then, who is doing the multi-host scheduling, Hyper or something
else? Were you suggesting to integrate Hyper with Magnum directly? Or you
were suggesting to integrate Hyper with Magnum indirectly (i.e. through
k8s, mesos and/or Nova)?
Best regards,
Hongbin
From: Peng Zhao [mailto:peng at hyper.sh]
Sent: July-17-15 12:34 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][bp] Power Magnum to run on metal
with Hyper
Hi, Adrian, Jay and all,
There could be a much longer version of this, but let me try to explain
in a minimalist way.
Bay currently has two modes: VM-based, BM-based. In both cases, Bay helps
to isolate different tenants' containers. In other words, bay is
single-tenancy. For BM-based bay, the single tenancy is a worthy
tradeoff, given the performance merits of LXC vs VM. However, for a
VM-based bay, there is no performance gain, but single tenancy seems a
must, due to the lack of isolation in container. Hyper, as a
hypervisor-based substitute for container, brings the much-needed
isolation, and therefore enables multi-tenancy. In HyperStack, we don't
really need Ironic to provision multiple Hyper bays. On the other hand,
the entire HyperStack cluster is a single big "bay". Pretty similar to
how Nova works.
Also, HyperStack is able to leverage Cinder, Neutron for SDS/SDN
functionality. So when someone submits a Docker Compose app, HyperStack
would launch HyperVMs and call Cinder/Neutron to setup the volumes and
network. The architecture is quite simple.
Here are a blog I'd like to recommend:
https://hyper.sh/blog/post/2015/06/29/docker-hyper-and-the-end-of-guest-os.html
Let me know your questions.
Thanks,
Peng
------------------ Original ------------------
From: "Adrian Otto"<adrian.otto at rackspace.com>;
Date: Thu, Jul 16, 2015 11:02 PM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"<
openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>;
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][bp] Power Magnum to run
onmetalwith Hyper
Jay,
Hyper is a substitute for a Docker host, so I expect it could work
equally well for all of the current bay types. Hyper’s idea of a “pod”
and a Kubernetes “pod” are similar, but different. I’m not yet convinced
that integrating Hyper host creation direct with Magnum (and completely
bypassing nova) is a good idea. It probably makes more sense to implement
use nova with the ironic dirt driver to provision Hyper hosts so we can
use those as substitutes for Bay nodes in our various Bay types. This
would fit in the place were we use Fedora Atomic today. We could still
rely on nova to do all of the machine instance management and accounting
like we do today, but produce bays that use Hyper instead of a Docker
host. Everywhere we currently offer CoreOS as an option we could also
offer Hyper as an alternative, with some caveats.
There may be some caveats/drawbacks to consider before committing to a
Hyper integration. I’ll be asking those of Peng also on this thread, so
keep an eye out.
Thanks,
Adrian
On Jul 16, 2015, at 3:23 AM, Jay Lau <jay.lau.513 at gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks Peng, then I can see two integration points for Magnum and
Hyper:
1) Once Hyper and k8s integration finished, we can deploy k8s in
two mode: docker and hyper mode, the end user can select which mode
they want to use. For such case, we do not need to create a new bay
but may need some enhancement for current k8s bay
2) After mesos and hyper integration, we can treat mesos and hyper
as a new bay to magnum. Just like what we are doing now for mesos
+marathon.
Thanks!
2015-07-16 17:38 GMT+08:00 Peng Zhao <peng at hyper.sh>:
Hi Jay,
Yes, we are working with the community to integrate Hyper with Mesos and
K8S. Since Hyper uses Pod as the default job unit, it is quite easy to
integrate with K8S. Mesos takes a bit more efforts, but still
straightforward.
We expect to finish both integration in v0.4 early August.
Best,
Peng
-----------------------------------------------------
Hyper - Make VM run like Container
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 3:47 PM, Jay Lau <jay.lau.513 at gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Peng,
Just want to get more for Hyper. If we create a hyper bay, then can I set
up multiple hosts in a hyper bay? If so, who will do the scheduling, does
mesos or some others integrate with hyper?
I did not find much info for hyper cluster management.
Thanks.
2015-07-16 9:54 GMT+08:00 Peng Zhao <peng at hyper.sh>:
------------------ Original ------------------
From: “Adrian Otto”<adrian.otto at rackspace.com>;
Date: Wed, Jul 15, 2015 02:31 AM
To: “OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)“<
openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>;
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][bp] Power Magnum to run onmetal
withHyper
Peng,
On Jul 13, 2015, at 8:37 PM, Peng Zhao <peng at hyper.sh> wrote:
Thanks Adrian!
Hi, all,
Let me recap what is hyper and the idea of hyperstack.
Hyper is a single-host runtime engine. Technically,
Docker = LXC + AUFS
Hyper = Hypervisor + AUFS
where AUFS is the Docker image.
I do not understand the last line above. My understanding is that AUFS ==
UnionFS, which is used to implement a storage driver for Docker. Others
exist for btrfs, and devicemapper. You select which one you want by
setting an option like this:
DOCKEROPTS=”-s devicemapper”
Are you trying to say that with Hyper, AUFS is used to provide layered
Docker image capability that are shared by multiple hypervisor guests?
Peng >>> Yes, AUFS implies the Docker images here.
My guess is that you are trying to articulate that a host running Hyper
is a 1:1 substitute for a host running Docker, and will respond using the
Docker remote API. This would result in containers running on the same
host that have a superior security isolation than they would if LXC was
used as the backend to Docker. Is this correct?
Peng>>> Exactly
Due to the shared-kernel nature of LXC, Docker lacks of the necessary
isolation in a multi-tenant CaaS platform, and this is what
Hyper/hypervisor is good at.
And because of this, most CaaS today run on top of IaaS:
https://trello-attachments.s3.amazonaws.com/55545e127c7cbe0ec5b82f2b/388x2
75/e286dea1266b46c1999d566b0f9e326b/iaas.png
Hyper enables the native, secure, bare-metal CaaS
https://trello-attachments.s3.amazonaws.com/55545e127c7cbe0ec5b82f2b/395x2
44/828ad577dafb3f357e95899e962651b2/caas.png
From the tech stack perspective, Hyperstack turns Magnum o run in parallel
with Nova, not running on atop.
For this to work, we’d expect to get a compute host from Heat, so if the
bay type were set to “hyper”, we’d need to use a template that can produce
a compute host running Hyper. How would that host be produced, if we do
not get it from nova? Might it make more sense to make a dirt driver for
nova that could produce a Hyper guest on a host already running the
nova-compute agent? That way Magnum would not need to re-create any of
Nova’s functionality in order to produce nova instances of type “hyper”.
Peng >>> We don’t have to get the physical host from nova. Let’s say
OpenStack = Nova+Cinder+Neutron+Bare-metal+KVM, so “AWS-like IaaS for
everyone else”
HyperStack= Magnum+Cinder+Neutron+Bare-metal+Hyper, then “Google-like
CaaS for everyone else”
Ideally, customers should deploy a single OpenStack cluster, with both
nova/kvm and magnum/hyper. I’m looking for a solution to make nova/magnum
co-exist.
Is Hyper compatible with libvirt?
Peng>>> We are working on the libvirt integration, expect in v0.5
Can Hyper support nested Docker containers within the Hyper guest?
Peng>>> Docker in Docker? In a HyperVM instance, there is no docker
daemon, cgroup and namespace (except MNT for pod). VM serves the purpose
of isolation. We plan to support cgroup and namespace, so you can control
whether multiple containers in a pod share the same namespace, or
completely isolated. But in either case, no docker daemon is present.
Thanks,
Adrian Otto
Best,
Peng
------------------ Original ------------------
From: “Adrian Otto”<adrian.otto at rackspace.com>;
Date: Tue, Jul 14, 2015 07:18 AM
To: “OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage
questions)“<openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>;
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][bp] Power Magnum to run on
metal withHyper
Team,
I woud like to ask for your input about adding support for Hyper in
Magnum:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/hyperstack
We touched on this in our last team meeting, and it was apparent
that achieving a higher level of understanding of the technology
before weighing in about the directional approval of this
blueprint. Peng Zhao and Xu Wang have graciously agreed to respond
to this thread to address questions about how the technology works,
and how it could be integrated with Magnum.
Please take a moment to review the blueprint, and ask your
questions here on this thread.
Thanks,
Adrian Otto
On Jul 2, 2015, at 8:48 PM, Peng Zhao <peng at hyper.sh> wrote:
Here is the bp of Magnum+Hyper+Metal integration:
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/hyperstack
Wanted to hear more thoughts and kickstart some brainstorming.
Thanks,
Peng
-----------------------------------------------------
Hyper - Make VM run like Container
_____________________________________________________________
_____________
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
___________________________________________________________________
_______
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
________________________________________________________________________
__
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
--
Thanks,
Jay Lau (Guangya Liu)
_________________________________________________________________________
_
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
__________________________________________________________________________
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
--
Thanks,
Jay Lau (Guangya Liu)
__________________________________________________________________________
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
__________________________________________________________________________
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
--
Thanks,
Jay Lau (Guangya Liu)
__________________________________________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150720/a5094d69/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: graycol.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 105 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150720/a5094d69/attachment.gif>
More information about the OpenStack-dev
mailing list
