Open Stack

Hi, Yipei and Shinobu,

It'll be good to store historical pod bindings and current active pod binding. Your comments?

Best Regards
Chaoyi Huang ( Joe Huang )


-----Original Message-----
From: Shinobu Kinjo [mailto:shinobu.kj at gmail.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2016 11:13 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [tricircle] About the dynamic pod binding

Hi Yipei,

On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 10:59 AM, Yipei Niu <newypei at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, all,
>
> I think I understand how does tricircle schedule pods. Based on the 
> flavor extra_specs or volume extra_specs tags, tricircle queries the 
> pod table for the records in which resource_affinity_tag is set. Those 
> pods that have the same key-value pair with extra_specs tag will be selected. Is it correct?

Key points are described in our blueprint. [1]

6 Design Principles
 6.1 Overview
  Pod Table

7.2 Resource Routing Table

  especially,

7.3  Resource Create Request Dispatch

>
> Furthermore, I still have a question mentioned. Do we need to store 
> historical pod binding records in the pod binding table?

If you are talking about `pod_binding` table, I think "yes".
This requirement is also described in our blueprint. [1]

6 Design Principles
 6.1 Overview
  Pod Table

But I think that the code bases need to be reflectorred a bit more, so that we implement more necessary functionalities, sophisticate them and make them simple as much as possible.

@Team,

If I've missed anything, please point them out to me.

[1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/18kZZ1snMOCD9IQvUKI5NVDzSASpw-QKj7l2zNqMEd3g/edit#

Chees,
Shinobu

>
> Best regards,
> Yipei
>
> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 2:58 PM, Shinobu Kinjo <shinobu.kj at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Yipei,
>>
>> According to Chaoyi, you have a bunch of experiences regarding to the 
>> OpenStack, networking which is awesome.
>>
>> I look forward to hearing from you soon.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Shinobu
>>
>> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Yipei Niu <newypei at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Got it with thanks.
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> > Yipei
>> >
>> > On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 9:48 AM, joehuang <joehuang at huawei.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi, Yipei,
>> >>
>> >> Shinobu is correct, this should be taken into consideration in the 
>> >> design of dynamic pod binding.
>> >>
>> >> How to schedule pod, you can refer to host-aggregate scheduling 
>> >> with flavor, the difference is that the scheduling granularity is 
>> >> on pod level.
>> >> By the tag in flavor extra-spec and volume type extrac_spec , 
>> >> tricircle can be aware of which type of resource the tenant wants 
>> >> to provision.
>> >>
>> >> For example:
>> >>
>> >> https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-US/Red_Hat_Enterprise_L
>> >> inux_OpenStack_Platform/4/html/Configuration_Reference_Guide/host-
>> >> aggregates.html
>> >>
>> >> So in
>> >>
>> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/18kZZ1snMOCD9IQvUKI5NVDzSASpw-Q
>> >> Kj7l2zNqMEd3g/edit, one field called resource_affinity_tag is 
>> >> proposed to be added into the pod table, it could be used for 
>> >> scheduling purpose. But this is only one proposal, you may have 
>> >> better idea to do that, after the spec is reviewed and approved, 
>> >> the doc can be update to reflect the new idea.
>> >>
>> >> Best Regards
>> >> Chaoyi Huang ( Joe Huang )
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> -----Original Message-----
>> >> From: Shinobu Kinjo [mailto:shinobu.kj at gmail.com]
>> >> Sent: Friday, May 06, 2016 8:06 AM
>> >> To: Yipei Niu
>> >> Cc: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions); 
>> >> joehuang; Zhiyuan Cai; 金城 忍
>> >> Subject: Re: [tricircle] About the dynamic pod binding
>> >>
>> >> Hi Yipei,
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Yipei Niu <newypei at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > Hi, all,
>> >> >
>> >> > For dynamic pod binding, I have some questions.
>> >> >
>> >> [snip]
>> >> > 3. How is Tricircle aware of what type of resource wanted by tenants?
>> >> > For example, a tenant wants to boot VMs for CAD modelling with 
>> >> > corresponding flavor. But in current code, the flavorRef is not 
>> >> > get involved in function get_pod_by_az_tenant, when querying pod 
>> >> > bindings.
>> >> > So do we need to modify the pod binding table to add such a column?
>> >>
>> >> Working through code bases, probably you are talking about future 
>> >> implementation, I guess.
>> >>
>> >> Cheers,
>> >> Shinobu
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Best regards,
>> >> > Yipei
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Email:
>> >> shinobu at linux.com
>> >> shinobu at redhat.com
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Email:
>> shinobu at linux.com
>> shinobu at redhat.com
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> ____ 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
>



--
Email:
shinobu at linux.com
shinobu at redhat.com

__________________________________________________________________________
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