Hi Gokul,
2014-03-05 3:30 GMT+08:00 Gokul Kandiraju <gokul4o...@gmail.com>: > > > Dear All, > > > > We are working on a framework where we want to monitor the system and take > certain actions when specific events or situations occur. Here are two > examples of 'different' situations: > > > > Example 1: A VM's-Owner and N/W's-owner are different ==> this could > mean a violation ==> we need to take some action > > Example 2: A simple policy such as (VM-migrate of all VMs on possible > node failure) OR (a more complex Energy Policy that may involve > optimization). > > > > Both these examples need monitoring and actions to be taken when certain > events happen (or through polling). However, the first one falls into the > Compliance domain with Boolean conditions getting evaluated while the > second one may require a more richer set of expression allowing for > sequences or algorithms. > > So far, based on this discussion, it seems that these are *separate* > initiatives in the community. I am understanding the Congress project to be > in the domain of Boolean conditions (used for Compliance, etc.) where as > the Run-time-policies (Jay's proposal) where policies can be expressed as > rules, algorithms with higher-level goals. Is this understanding correct? > > Also, looking at all the mails, this is what I am reading: > > > > 1. Congress -- Focused on Compliance [ is that correct? ] (Boolean > constraints and logic) > > > > 2. Runtime-Policies -- <Jay's mail> -- Focused on Runtime policies > for Load Balancing, Availability, Energy, etc. (sequences of actions, > rules, algorithms) > [Jay] Yes, exactly. > > > 3. SolverScheduler -- Focused on Placement [ static or runtime ] and > will be invoked by the (above) policy engines > > > > 4. Gantt - Focused on (Holistic) Scheduling > [Jay] For 3 and 4, I was always thinking Gantt is doing something for implementing SolverScheduler, not sure if run time policy can be included. > > > 5. Neat -- seems to be a special case of Runtime-Policies (policies > based on Load) > > > > Would this be correct understanding? We need to understand this to > contribute to the right project. :) > > > > Thanks! > > -Gokul > > > > On Fri, Feb 28, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Jay Lau <jay.lau....@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Yathiraj and Tim, >> >> Really appreciate your comments here ;-) >> >> I will prepare some detailed slides or documents before summit and we can >> have a review then. It would be great if OpenStack can provide "DRS" >> features. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Jay >> >> >> >> 2014-03-01 6:00 GMT+08:00 Tim Hinrichs <thinri...@vmware.com>: >> >> Hi Jay, >>> >>> I think the Solver Scheduler is a better fit for your needs than >>> Congress because you know what kinds of constraints and enforcement you >>> want. I'm not sure this topic deserves an entire design session--maybe >>> just talking a bit at the summit would suffice (I *think* I'll be >>> attending). >>> >>> Tim >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> | From: "Jay Lau" <jay.lau....@gmail.com> >>> | To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < >>> openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> >>> | Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 6:30:54 PM >>> | Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack][Runtime Policy] A proposal >>> for OpenStack run time policy to manage >>> | compute/storage resource >>> | >>> | >>> | >>> | >>> | >>> | >>> | Hi Tim, >>> | >>> | I'm not sure if we can put resource monitor and adjust to >>> | solver-scheduler (Gantt), but I have proposed this to Gantt design >>> | [1], you can refer to [1] and search "jay-lau-513". >>> | >>> | IMHO, Congress does monitoring and also take actions, but the actions >>> | seems mainly for adjusting single VM network or storage. It did not >>> | consider migrating VM according to hypervisor load. >>> | >>> | Not sure if this topic deserved to be a design session for the coming >>> | summit, but I will try to propose. >>> | >>> | >>> | >>> | >>> | [1] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/icehouse-external-scheduler >>> | >>> | >>> | >>> | Thanks, >>> | >>> | >>> | Jay >>> | >>> | >>> | >>> | 2014-02-27 1:48 GMT+08:00 Tim Hinrichs < thinri...@vmware.com > : >>> | >>> | >>> | Hi Jay and Sylvain, >>> | >>> | The solver-scheduler sounds like a good fit to me as well. It clearly >>> | provisions resources in accordance with policy. Does it monitor >>> | those resources and adjust them if the system falls out of >>> | compliance with the policy? >>> | >>> | I mentioned Congress for two reasons. (i) It does monitoring. (ii) >>> | There was mention of compute, networking, and storage, and I >>> | couldn't tell if the idea was for policy that spans OS components or >>> | not. Congress was designed for policies spanning OS components. >>> | >>> | >>> | Tim >>> | >>> | ----- Original Message ----- >>> | >>> | | From: "Jay Lau" < jay.lau....@gmail.com > >>> | | To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" >>> | | < openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > >>> | >>> | >>> | | Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 10:13:14 PM >>> | | Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack][Runtime Policy] A proposal >>> | | for OpenStack run time policy to manage >>> | | compute/storage resource >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | Thanks Sylvain and Tim for the great sharing. >>> | | >>> | | @Tim, I also go through with Congress and have the same feeling >>> | | with >>> | | Sylvai, it is likely that Congress is doing something simliar with >>> | | Gantt providing a holistic way for deploying. What I want to do is >>> | | to provide some functions which is very similar with VMWare DRS >>> | | that >>> | | can do some adaptive scheduling automatically. >>> | | >>> | | @Sylvain, can you please show more detail for what "Pets vs. >>> | | Cattles >>> | | analogy" means? >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | 2014-02-26 9:11 GMT+08:00 Sylvain Bauza < sylvain.ba...@gmail.com > >>> | | : >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | Hi Tim, >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | As per I'm reading your design document, it sounds more likely >>> | | related to something like Solver Scheduler subteam is trying to >>> | | focus on, ie. intelligent agnostic resources placement on an >>> | | holistic way [1] >>> | | IIRC, Jay is more likely talking about adaptive scheduling >>> | | decisions >>> | | based on feedback with potential counter-measures that can be done >>> | | for decreasing load and preserving QoS of nodes. >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | That said, maybe I'm wrong ? >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | [1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/solver-scheduler >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | 2014-02-26 1:09 GMT+01:00 Tim Hinrichs < thinri...@vmware.com > : >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | Hi Jay, >>> | | >>> | | The Congress project aims to handle something similar to your use >>> | | cases. I just sent a note to the ML with a Congress status update >>> | | with the tag [Congress]. It includes links to our design docs. Let >>> | | me know if you have trouble finding it or want to follow up. >>> | | >>> | | Tim >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | ----- Original Message ----- >>> | | | From: "Sylvain Bauza" < sylvain.ba...@gmail.com > >>> | | | To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage >>> | | | questions)" >>> | | | < openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org > >>> | | | Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2014 3:58:07 PM >>> | | | Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack][Runtime Policy] A >>> | | | proposal >>> | | | for OpenStack run time policy to manage >>> | | | compute/storage resource >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | Hi Jay, >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | Currently, the Nova scheduler only acts upon user request (either >>> | | | live migration or boot an instance). IMHO, that's something Gantt >>> | | | should scope later on (or at least there could be some space >>> | | | within >>> | | | the Scheduler) so that Scheduler would be responsible for >>> | | | managing >>> | | | resources on a dynamic way. >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | I'm thinking of the Pets vs. Cattles analogy, and I definitely >>> | | | think >>> | | | that Compute resources could be treated like Pets, provided the >>> | | | Scheduler does a move. >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | -Sylvain >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | 2014-02-26 0:40 GMT+01:00 Jay Lau < jay.lau....@gmail.com > : >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | Greetings, >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | Here I want to bring up an old topic here and want to get some >>> | | | input >>> | | | from you experts. >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | Currently in nova and cinder, we only have some initial placement >>> | | | polices to help customer deploy VM instance or create volume >>> | | | storage >>> | | | to a specified host, but after the VM or the volume was created, >>> | | | there was no policy to monitor the hypervisors or the storage >>> | | | servers to take some actions in the following case: >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | 1) Load Balance Policy: If the load of one server is too heavy, >>> | | | then >>> | | | probably we need to migrate some VMs from high load servers to >>> | | | some >>> | | | idle servers automatically to make sure the system resource usage >>> | | | can be balanced. >>> | | | >>> | | | 2) HA Policy: If one server get down for some hardware failure or >>> | | | whatever reasons, there is no policy to make sure the VMs can be >>> | | | evacuated or live migrated (Make sure migrate the VM before >>> | | | server >>> | | | goes down) to other available servers to make sure customer >>> | | | applications will not be affect too much. >>> | | | >>> | | | 3) Energy Saving Policy: If a single host load is lower than >>> | | | configured threshold, then low down the frequency of the CPU to >>> | | | save >>> | | | energy; otherwise, increase the CPU frequency. If the average >>> | | | load >>> | | | is lower than configured threshold, then shutdown some >>> | | | hypervisors >>> | | | to save energy; otherwise, power on some hypervisors to load >>> | | | balance. Before power off a hypervisor host, the energy policy >>> | | | need >>> | | | to live migrate all VMs on the hypervisor to other available >>> | | | hypervisors; After Power on a hypervisor host, the Load Balance >>> | | | Policy will help live migrate some VMs to the new powered >>> | | | hypervisor. >>> | | | >>> | | | 4) Customized Policy: Customer can also define some customized >>> | | | policies based on their specified requirement. >>> | | | >>> | | | 5) Some run-time policies for block storage or even network. >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | I borrow the idea from VMWare DRS (Thanks VMWare DRS), and there >>> | | | indeed many customers want such features. >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | I have filed a bp here [1] long ago, but after some discussion >>> | | | with >>> | | | Russell, we think that this should not belong to nova but other >>> | | | projects. Till now, I did not find a good place where we can put >>> | | | this in, can any of you show some comments? >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | [1] >>> | | | >>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/resource-optimization-service >>> | | | >>> | | | -- >>> | | | >>> | | | >>> | | | Thanks, >>> | | | >>> | | | Jay >>> | | | >>> | | | _______________________________________________ >>> | | | 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 >>> | | | >>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev&k=oIvRg1%2BdGAgOoM1BIlLLqw%3D%3D%0A&r=%2FZ35AkRhp2kCW4Q3MPeE%2BxY2bqaf%2FKm29ZfiqAKXxeo%3D%0A&m=XDB3hT4WE2iDrNVK0sQ8qKooX2r1T4E%2BVHek3GREhnE%3D%0A&s=e2346cd017c9d8108c12a101892492e2ac75953e4a5ea5c17394c775cf086d7f >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | | >>> | | >>> | | _______________________________________________ >>> | | 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 >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | -- >>> | | >>> | | >>> | | Thanks, >>> | | >>> | | Jay >>> | | >>> | | _______________________________________________ >>> | | OpenStack-dev mailing list >>> | | OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >>> | | >>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev&k=oIvRg1%2BdGAgOoM1BIlLLqw%3D%3D%0A&r=%2FZ35AkRhp2kCW4Q3MPeE%2BxY2bqaf%2FKm29ZfiqAKXxeo%3D%0A&m=E45fhmBClHHPExheGdRk0z%2Bj72gQAP4Zc1W3XElJx60%3D%0A&s=684cee6930f5d74f56e1ab9fc42e5f3c2511f07948f357040ca2dc175c4ccee6 >>> | >>> | >>> | | >>> | >>> | _______________________________________________ >>> | OpenStack-dev mailing list >>> | OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >>> | http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>> | >>> | >>> | >>> | -- >>> | >>> | >>> | Thanks, >>> | >>> | Jay >>> | >>> | _______________________________________________ >>> | OpenStack-dev mailing list >>> | OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >>> | >>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v1/url?u=http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev&k=oIvRg1%2BdGAgOoM1BIlLLqw%3D%3D%0A&r=%2FZ35AkRhp2kCW4Q3MPeE%2BxY2bqaf%2FKm29ZfiqAKXxeo%3D%0A&m=oXtNDrtlvCX0d%2BN7rnJXx5e3YjkX%2FGQHVTRP%2BN7hKrw%3D%0A&s=40f6f376ab93e166f327385661db38cf88ca6f2563fbc003cd94d81bf596f9c4 >>> | >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OpenStack-dev mailing list >>> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Thanks, >> >> Jay >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > -- Thanks, Jay
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev