[openstack-dev] [nova][scheduler][placement] Trying to understand the proposed direction

Edward Leafe ed at leafe.com
Tue Jun 20 13:52:50 UTC 2017

On Jun 20, 2017, at 8:38 AM, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The example I posted used 3 resource providers. 2 compute nodes with no local disk and a shared storage pool.
>> Now I’m even more confused. In the straw man example (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/471927/ <https://review.openstack.org/#/c/471927/>) <https://review.openstack.org/#/c/471927/3/specs/pike/approved/placement-allocation-requests.rst <https://review.openstack.org/#/c/471927/3/specs/pike/approved/placement-allocation-requests.rst>> I see only one variable ($COMPUTE_NODE_UUID) referencing a compute node in the response.
> I'm referring to the example I put in this email threads in paste.openstack.org <http://paste.openstack.org/> with numbers showing 1600 bytes for 3 resource providers:
> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-June/118593.html <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-June/118593.html>

And I’m referring to the comment I made on the spec back on June 13 that was never corrected/clarified. I’m glad you gave an example yesterday after I expressed my confusion; that was the whole purpose of starting this thread. Things may be clear to you, but they have confused me and others. We can’t help if we don’t understand.

-- Ed Leafe

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20170620/04e4da68/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list