[openstack-dev] [nova] [placement] experimenting with extracting placement

John Garbutt john at johngarbutt.com
Wed Mar 15 12:21:22 UTC 2017

On 13 March 2017 at 15:17, Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 03/13/2017 11:13 AM, Dan Smith wrote:
>> Interestingly, we just had a meeting about cells and the scheduler,
>> which had quite a bit of overlap on this topic.
>>> That said, as mentioned in the previous email, the priorities for Pike
>>> (and likely Queens) will continue to be, in order: traits, ironic,
>>> shared resource pools, and nested providers.
>> Given that the CachingScheduler is still a thing until we get claims in
>> the scheduler, and given that CachingScheduler doesn't use placement
>> like the FilterScheduler does, I think we need to prioritize the claims
>> part of the above list.
>> Based on the discussion several of us just had, the priority list
>> actually needs to be this:
>> 1. Traits
>> 2. Ironic
>> 3. Claims in the scheduler
>> 4. Shared resources
>> 5. Nested resources
>> Claims in the scheduler is not likely to be a thing for Pike, but should
>> be something we do as much prep for as possible, and land early in Queens.
>> Personally, I think getting to the point of claiming in the scheduler
>> will be easier if we have placement in tree, and anything we break in
>> that process will be easier to backport if they're in the same tree.
>> However, I'd say that after that goal is met, splitting placement should
>> be good to go.
> ++

+1 from me, a bit late I know.


More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list