Open Stack

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:

> Ironic colleagues, heads up, please read the below fully! I'd like your
> feedback on a couple outstanding questions.
>
> tl;dr
> -----
>
> Work for custom resource classes has been proceeding well this cycle, and
> we're at a point where reviews from the Ironic community and functional
> testing of a series of patches would be extremely helpful.
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/custom-resource-cl
> asses+status:open


\o/ will do sir.


>
>
> History
> -------
>
> As a brief reminder, in Newton, the Ironic community added a
> "resource_class" attribute to the primary Node object returned by the GET
> /nodes/{uuid} API call. This resource class attribute represents the
> "hardware profile" (for lack of a better term) of the Ironic baremetal node.
>
> In Nova-land, we would like to stop tracking Ironic baremetal nodes as
> collections of vCPU, RAM, and disk space -- because an Ironic baremetal
> node is consumed atomically, not piecemeal like a hypervisor node is.
> We'd like to have the scheduler search for an appropriate Ironic baremetal
> node using a simplified search that simply looks for node that has a
> particular hardware profile [1] instead of searching for nodes that have a
> certain amount of VCPU, RAM, and disk space.
>
> In addition to the scheduling and "boot request" alignment issues, we want
> to fix the reporting and account of resources in an OpenStack deployment
> containing Ironic. Currently, Nova reports an aggregate amount of CPU, RAM
> and disk space but doesn't understand that, when Ironic is in the mix, that
> a significant chunk of that CPU, RAM and disk isn't "targetable" for
> virtual machines. We would much prefer to have resource reporting look like:
>
>  48 vCPU total, 14 used
>  204800 MB RAM total, 10240 used
>  1340 GB disk total, 100 used
>  250 baremetal profile "A" total, 120 used
>  120 baremetal profile "B" total, 16 used
>
> instead of mixing all the resources together.
>
> Need review and functional testing on a few things
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Now that the custom resource classes REST API endpoint is established [2]
> in the placement REST API, we are figuring out an appropriate way of
> migrating the existing inventory and allocation records for Ironic
> baremetal nodes from the "old-style" way of storing inventory for VCPU,
> MEMORY_MB and DISK_GB resources towards the "new-style" way of storing a
> single inventory record of amount 1 for the Ironic node's "resource_class"
> attribute.
>
> The patch that does this online data migration (from within the
> nova-compute resource tracker) is here:
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/404472/
>
> I'd really like to get some Ironic contributor eyeballs on that patch and
> provide me feedback on whether the logic in the
> _cleanup_ironic_legacy_allocations() method is sound.
>
> There are still a couple things that need to be worked out:
>
> 1) Should the resource tracker auto-create custom resource classes in the
> placement REST API when it sees an Ironic node's resource_class attribute
> set to a non-NULL value and there is no record of such a resource class in
> the `GET /resource-classes` placement API call? My gut reaction to this is
> "yes, let's just do it", but I want to check with operators and Ironic devs
> first. The alternative is to ignore errors about "no such resource class
> exists", log a warning, and wait for an administrator to create the custom
> resource classes that match the distinct Ironic node resource classes that
> may exist in the deployment.
>

I tend to agree with Matt, there's no need to make operators do this when
they've already explicitly configured it on the ironic side.


>
> 2) How we are going to modify the Nova baremetal flavors to specify that
> the flavor requires one resource where the resource is of a set of custom
> resource classes? For example, let's say I'm have an Ironic installation
> with 10 different Ironic node hardware profiles. I've set all my Ironic
> node's resource_class attributes to match one of those hardware profiles. I
> now need to set up a Nova flavor that requests one of those ten hardware
> profiles. How do I do that? One solution might be to have a hacky flavor
> extra_spec called "ironic_resource_classes=CUSTOM_METAL_A,CUSTOM_METAL_B..."
> or similar. When we construct the request_spec object that gets sent to the
> scheduler (and later the placement service), we could look for that
> extra_spec and construct a special request to the placement service that
> says "find me a resource provider that has a capacity of 1 for any of the
> following resource classes...". The flavor extra_specs thing is a total
> hack, admittedly, but flavors are the current mess that Nova has to specify
> requested resources and we need to work within that mess unfortunately...
>

As it was explained to me at the beginning of all this, flavors were going
to have some sort of JSON blob with the requirements, so for an ironic
flavor it would look something like:

    {
        "name": "baremetal-gold",
        "requires: {
            "baremetal-gold-resource-class": 1
        }
    }

And same for a VM flavor, which would require 512 RAMs and 10 disk_gbs and
such. Is that not the case? I really don't like the extra spec hack. Is
there some alternative?

FWIW, I don't see the need to match a flavor to multiple resource classes,
if that helps. Someone told me at the summit that Yahoo wanted this, but
Penick later told me this wasn't true, so I'm not sure if there's people
that actually want that.

// jim

P.S. As a clarification for others (since I had to ask Jay about it), we
still plan to allow old and new flavors to work in Ocata, to allow a smooth
transition to the new-style flavors.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20161205/a71b11ca/attachment.html>