On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 9:08 AM, Alex Xu <[email protected]> wrote:
2018-04-24 5:51 GMT+08:00 Arvind N <[email protected]>:
Thanks for the detailed options Matt/eric/jay.
Just few of my thoughts,
For #1, we can make the explanation very clear that we rejected the
request because the original traits specified in the original image
and the new traits specified in the new image do not match and hence
rebuild is not supported.
For #2,
Other Cons:
None of the filters currently make other API requests and my
understanding is we want to avoid reintroducing such a pattern. But
definitely workable solution.
If the user disables the image properties filter, then traits based
filtering will not be run in rebuild case
For #3,
Even though it handles the nested provider, there is a potential
issue.
Lets say a host with two SRIOV nic. One is normal SRIOV nic(VF1),
another one with some kind of offload feature(VF2).(Described by
alex)
Initial instance launch happens with VF:1 allocated, rebuild
launches with modified request with traits=HW_NIC_OFFLOAD_X, so
basically we want the instance to be allocated VF2.
But the original allocation happens against VF1 and since in rebuild
the original allocations are not changed, we have wrong allocations.
Yes, that is the case what I said, and none of #1,2,3,4 and the
proposal in this threads works also.
The problem isn't just checking the traits in the nested resource
provider. We also need to ensure the trait in the exactly same child
resource provider. Or we need to adjust allocations for the child
resource provider.
I agree that in_tree only ensure that the compute node tree has the
required traits but it does not take into account that only some of
those RPs from the tree provides resources for the current allocation.
The algorithm Eric provided in a previous mail do the filtering for the
RPs that are part of the instance allocation so that sounds good to me.
I think we should not try to adjust allocations during a rebuild.
Changing the allocation would mean it is not a rebuild any more but a
resize.
Cheers,
gibi
for #4, there is good amount of pushback against modifying the
allocation_candiadates api to not have resources.
Jay:
for the GET
/resource_providers?in_tree=<CN_UUID>&required=<IMAGE_TRAITS>,
nested resource providers and allocation pose a problem see #3 above.
I will investigate erics option and update the spec.
--
Arvind N
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe:
[email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
