On 02/07/14 02:41, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
Zane Bitter <[email protected]> wrote on 07/01/2014 06:58:47 PM:
> On 01/07/14 15:47, Mike Spreitzer wrote:
> > In AWS, an autoscaling group includes health maintenance functionality
> > --- both an ability to detect basic forms of failures and an ability to
> > react properly to failures detected by itself or by a load balancer.
> > What is the thinking about how to get this functionality in
OpenStack?
> > Since OpenStack's OS::Heat::AutoScalingGroup has a more general
member
> > type, what is the thinking about what failure detection means (and how
> > it would be accomplished, communicated)?
> >
> > I have not found design discussion of this; have I missed something?
>
> Yes :)
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/95907/
>
> The idea is that Convergence will provide health maintenance for _all_
> forms of resources in Heat. Once this is implemented, autoscaling gets
> it for free by virtue of that fact that it manages resources using Heat
> stacks.
Ah, right. My reading of that design is not quite so simple. Note that
in the User Stories section it calls for different treatment of Compute
instances depending on whether they are in a scaling group.
I don't believe that is a correct reading.
- ZB
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
