On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Joe Gordon <joe.gord...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 6:27 AM, Anne Gentle <a...@openstack.org> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 8:20 AM, Joe Gordon <joe.gord...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 4:42 AM, Sylvain Bauza <sylvain.ba...@bull.net> > >> wrote: > >> > Hi Joe, > >> > > >> > Thanks for your reply, I'll try to further explain. > >> > > >> > > >> > Le 03/03/2014 05:33, Joe Gordon a écrit : > >> > > >> >> On Sun, Mar 2, 2014 at 11:32 AM, Dina Belova <dbel...@mirantis.com> > >> >> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> Hello, folks! > >> >>> > >> >>> I'd like to request Climate project review for incubation. Here is > >> >>> official > >> >>> incubation application: > >> >>> > >> >>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Climate/Incubation > >> >> > >> >> I'm unclear on what Climate is trying to solve. I read the 'Detailed > >> >> Description' from the link above, and it states Climate is trying to > >> >> solve two uses cases (and the more generalized cases of those). > >> >> > >> >> 1) Compute host reservation (when user with admin privileges can > >> >> reserve hardware resources that are dedicated to the sole use of a > >> >> tenant) > >> >> 2) Virtual machine (instance) reservation (when user may ask > >> >> reservation service to provide him working VM not necessary now, but > >> >> also in the future) > >> > > >> > Climate is born from the idea of dedicating compute resources to a > >> > single > >> > tenant or user for a certain amount of time, which was not yet > >> > implemented > >> > in Nova: how as an user, can I ask Nova for one compute host with > >> > certain > >> > specs to be exclusively allocated to my needs, starting in 2 days and > >> > being > >> > freed in 5 days ? > >> > > >> > Albeit the exclusive resource lock can be managed on the Nova side, > >> > there is > >> > currently no possibilities to ensure resource planner. > >> > > >> > Of course, and that's why we think Climate can also stand by its own > >> > Program, resource reservation can be seen on a more general way : what > >> > about > >> > reserving an Heat stack with its volume and network nested resources ? > >> > > >> > > >> >> You want to support being able to reserve an instance in the future. > >> >> As a cloud operator how do I take advantage of that information? As a > >> >> cloud consumer, what is the benefit? Today OpenStack supports both > >> >> uses cases, except it can't request an Instance for the future. > >> > > >> > > >> > Again, that's not only reserving an instance, but rather a complex mix > >> > of > >> > resources. At the moment, we do provide way to reserve virtual > instances > >> > by > >> > shelving/unshelving them at the lease start, but we also give > >> > possibility to > >> > provide dedicated compute hosts. Considering it, the logic of resource > >> > allocation and scheduling (take the word as resource planner, in order > >> > not > >> > to confuse with Nova's scheduler concerns) and capacity planning is > too > >> > big > >> > to fail under the Compute's umbrella, as it has been agreed within the > >> > Summit talks and periodical threads. > >> > >> Capacity planning not falling under Compute's umbrella is news to me, > >> are you referring to Gantt and scheduling in general? Perhaps I don't > >> fully understand the full extent of what 'capacity planning' actually > >> is. > >> > >> > > >> > From the user standpoint, there are multiple ways to integrate with > >> > Climate > >> > in order to get Capacity Planning capabilities. As you perhaps > noticed, > >> > the > >> > workflow for reserving resources is different from one plugin to > >> > another. > >> > Either we say the user has to explicitly request for dedicated > resources > >> > (using Climate CLI, see dedicate compute hosts allocation), or we > >> > implicitly > >> > integrate resource allocation from the Nova API (see virtual instance > >> > API > >> > hook). > >> > >> I don't see how Climate reserves resources is relevant to the user. > >> > >> > > >> > We truly accept our current implementation as a first prototype, where > >> > scheduling decisions can be improved (possibly thanks to some tight > >> > integration with a future external Scheduler aaS, hello Gantt), where > >> > also > >> > resource isolation and preemption must also be integrated with > >> > subprojects > >> > (we're currently seeing how to provision Cinder volumes and Neutron > >> > routers > >> > and nets), but anyway we still think there is a (IMHO big) room for > >> > resource > >> > and capacity management on its own project. > >> > > >> > Hoping it's clearer now, > >> > >> Unfortunately that doesn't clarify things for me. > >> > >> From the user's point of view what is the benefit from making a > >> reservation in the future? Versus what Nova supports today, asking for > >> an instance in the present. > >> > >> Same thing from the operator's perspective, what is the benefit of > >> taking reservations for the future? > >> > >> This whole model is unclear to me because as far as I can tell no > >> other clouds out there support this model, so I have nothing to > >> compare it to. > >> > > > > Hi Joe, > > I think it's meant to save consumers money by pricing instances based on > > today's prices. > > > > https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/purchasing-options/reserved-instances/ > > > The reserved concept in Amazon, is very different then the one > proposed here. The amazon concept doesn't support saying I will need > an instance in 3 days, this is trying to support that use case. > Furthermore I am not sure how the climate proposal would allow a > cloud provider to offer a cheaper offering. > > It feels like it should be part of a scheduler or reservation program but we don't have one today. We also don't have a workflow, planning, or capacity management program, all of which these use cases could fall under. (I should know this but) What are the options when a program doesn't exist already? Am I actually struggling with a scope expansion beyond infrastructure definitions? I'd like some more discussion by next week's TC meeting. Thanks, Anne > > > > Anne > > > >> > >> > -Sylvain > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > OpenStack-dev mailing list > >> > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > >> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> OpenStack-dev mailing list > >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenStack-dev mailing list > > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
