[openstack-dev] [all] [tc] "No Open Core" in 2016

Tim Bell Tim.Bell at cern.ch
Thu Feb 11 07:54:45 UTC 2016

On 11/02/16 00:33, "gordon chung" <gord at live.ca> wrote:

>On 10/02/2016 4:28 PM, Tim Bell wrote:
>> On 10/02/16 21:53, "gordon chung" <gord at live.ca> wrote:
>>> apologies if this was asked somewhere else in thread, but should we try
>>> to define "production" scale or can we even? based on the last survey,
>>> the vast majority of deployments are under 100nodes[1]. that said, a few
>>> years ago, one company was dreaming 100,000 nodes.
>>> i'd imagine the 50 node solution won't satisfy the 1000 node solution
>>> let alone the 10k node. similarly, the opposite direction will probably
>>> give an overkill solution. it seems somewhat difficult to define
>>> something against 'production' term unless we scope it somehow (e.g # of
>>> node ranges)?
>>> [1] http://www.openstack.org/assets/survey/Public-User-Survey-Report.pdf
>> As always, scale is relative. However, projects have shown major difficulties to scale to 10% of the larger deployments. Scaling beyond that, even with commercial solutions, has required major investments in custom configurations by the deployers.
>> There are two risks I see
>> A. Use sqlite and then change to proprietary solution X for scale
>> B. Works at a small scale but scalability has not been considered as a design criteria or demonstrated
>> I think it is important that the community is informed on these constraints before feeling that a particular project is the solution for them and that the TC factors these questions into their approval criteria.
>is there a source for this? a place where people list their reference 
>architectures and deployment scales?
>i'm not a deployer but as an outsider, i've found that there isn't a lot 
>of transparency in regards to how projects have been made to scale. 
>maybe this is a side effect of OpenStack being hard as hell to use, but 
>it seems configurations are the secret sauce people use to sell so we 
>have a lot of failure stories (bottom-end constraints) in the community 
>rather than successes (upper-end constraints).
>are there a collection of fully transparent deployers out there to be 
>our 'production' baseline? to help vet scalability? just CERN?

The large deployment team (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Large_Deployment_Team) meets regularly and presents architectures at the summits and ops mid cycle meetup ‘show&tell’ sessions. I can remember presentations from Walmart, Paypal/eBay, Rackspace and Yahoo! recently. The LDT etherpads also contain a lot of information. This is then regularly put into the ops manual (http://docs.openstack.org/openstack-ops/content/architecture.html).

>OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2792 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160211/120e7635/attachment.bin>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list