Open Stack

Thanks John.
I’m also not sure what the future would be, but I’d say that it would be nice to
have a hybrid OpenStack cluster of both VM/App-Container flavor. And yes, it is
more about a unified model between Nova and Magnum.
Best, Peng
----------------------------------------------------- Hyper - Make VM run like Container


On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:10 PM, John Garbutt < john at johngarbutt.com > wrote:
On 22 June 2015 at 09:18, Sahid Orentino Ferdjaoui
< sahid.ferdjaoui at redhat.com > wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 07:18:10PM +0300, Joe Gordon wrote:
>> On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Peng Zhao <peng at hyper.sh> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi, all,
>> >
>> > I would like to propose nova-hyper driver:
>> > https://blueprints.launchpad. net/nova/+spec/nova-hyper .
>> >
>> > - What is Hyper?
>> > Put simply, Hyper is a hypervisor-agnostic Docker runtime. It is
>> > similar to Intel’s ClearContainer, allowing to run a Docker image with any
>> > hypervisor.
>> >
>> > - Why Hyper driver?
>> > Given its hypervisor nature, Hyper makes it easy to integrate with
>> > OpenStack ecosystem, e.g. Nova, Cinder, Neutron
>> >
>> > - How to implement?
>> > Similar to nova-docker driver. Hyper has a daemon “hyperd” running on
>> > each physical box. hyperd exposed a set of REST APIs. Integrating Nova with
>> > the APIs would do the job.

For clarity, we are yet to accept the nova-docker driver into the Nova
project, due to various concerns about its potential future direction.
Hopefully we should get a more final answer on that soon.

>> > - Roadmap
>> > Integrate with Magnum & Ironic.
>> >
>> >
>> This sounds like a better fit for something on top of Nova such as Magnum
>> then as a Nova driver.

+1

On the surface, it feels like a possible Magnum driver.
Although I am far from certain that its an exact match.
But I think that would be a better starting point than Nova.

>> Nova only supports things that look like 'VMs'. That includes bare metal,
>> and containers, but it only includes a subset of container features.

+1

In your blueprint you mention:
"The difference between LXC and VM makes the driver hard to maintain a
unified model in Nova."

To be clear Nova has no intention of providing a unified model, in
part due to the truth behind your statement above. We provide things
that look like "servers". Please see:
http://docs.openstack.org/ developer/nova/project_scope. html#containers

I would recommending talking the container subgroup, in one of their
meetings, about how best to integrate with OpenStack:
https://wiki.openstack.org/ wiki/Meetings/Containers

>> Looking at the hyper CLI [0], there are many commands that nova would not
>> suppprt, such as:
>>
>> * The pod notion
>> * exec
>> * pull
>
> Then I guess you need to see if Hyper can implement mandatory features
> for Nova [1], [2].
>
> [1] http://docs.openstack.org/ developer/nova/support-matrix. html
> [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/ wiki/HypervisorSupportMatrix

We have no intention of expanding the scope of the Nova API to include
container operation. And the reverse is also true, we would want to
see an intention to support all the important existing APIs before
inclusion, and proving that be having tempest tests reliably passing.

Many thanks,
John

______________________________ ______________________________ ______________
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/20150622/15679f5b/attachment.html>