IMO there is more "global" problem. Anyone who wants to use baremetal deploy
service should resolve problems with power management, PXE/iPXE support,
DHCP, etc. Or he/she can use Ironic. User has his own vision of deploy workflow and features needed for it. He hears from Ironic people: "Feature X should be
only after release Y" or "This don't fit in Ironic at all".
Fuel Agent + driver is the answer. I see Fuel Agent + driver as a solution
for anyone who wants custom features.

On 12/09/2014 06:24 PM, Vladimir Kozhukalov wrote:

        We assume next step will be to put provision data (disk partition
        scheme, maybe other data) into driver_info and make Fuel Agent
        able to serialize those data (special format) and implement a
        corresponding data driver in Fuel Agent for this format. Again
        simple. Maybe it is time to think of having Ironic metadata
        (just maybe).

    I'm ok with the format, my question is: what and how is going to
    collect all the data and put into say driver_info?

Fuel has a web service which stores nodes info in its database. When user clicks "Deploy" button, this web service serializes deployment task and puts this task into task runner (another Fuel component). Then this task runner parses task and adds a node into Ironic via REST API (including driver_info). Then it calls Ironic deploy method and Ironic uses Fuel Agent driver to deploy a node. Corresponding Fuel spec is here https://review.openstack.org/#/c/138301/. Again it is zero step implementation.

        Honestly, I think writing roadmap right now is not very
        rational as far as I am not even sure people are interested in
        widening Ironic use cases. Some of the comments were not even
        constructive like "I don't understand what your use case is,
        please use IPA".

    Please don't be offended by this. We did put a lot of effort into
    IPA and it's reasonable to look for a good use cases before having
    one more smart ramdisk. Nothing personal, just estimating cost vs
    value :)
    Also "why not use IPA" is a fair question for me and the answer is
    about use cases (as you stated it before), not about missing
    features of IPA, right?

You are right it is a fair question, and answer is exactly about *missing features*.

        Nova is not our case. Fuel is totally about deployment. There
        is some in

    Here when we have a difficult point. Major use case for Ironic is
    to be driven by Nova (and assisted by Neutron). Without these two
    it's hard to understand how Fuel Agent is going to fit into the
    infrastructure. And hence my question above about where your json
    comes from. In the current Ironic world the same data is received
    partly from Nova flavor, partly managed by Neutron completely.
    I'm not saying it can't change - we do want to become more
    stand-alone. E.g. we can do without Neutron right now. I think
    specifying the source of input data for Fuel Agent in the Ironic
    infrastructure would help a lot understand, how well Ironic and
    Fuel Agent could play together.

According to the information I have, correct me if I'm wrong, Ironic currently is on the stage of becoming stand-alone service. That is the reason why this spec has been brought up. Again we need something to manage power/tftp/dhcp to substitute Cobbler. Ironic looks like a suitable tool, but we need this driver. We are not going to break anything. We have resources to test and support this driver. And I can not use IPA *right now* because it does not have features I need. I can not wait for next half a year for these features to be implemented. Why can't we add this (Fuel Agent) driver and then if IPA implements what we need we can switch to IPA. The only alternative for me right now is to implement my own power/tftp/dhcp management solution like I did with Fuel Agent when I did not get approve for including advanced disk partitioning.

Questions are: Is Ironic interested in this use case or not? Is Ironic interested to get more development resources? The only case when it's rational for us to spend our resources to develop Ironic is when we get something back. We are totally pragmatic, we just address our user's wishes and issues. It is ok for us to use any tool which provides what we need (IPA, Fuel Agent, any other).

We need advanced disk partitioning and power/tftp/dhcp management by March 2015. Is it possible to get this from Ironic + IPA? I doubt it. Is it possible to get this form Ironic + Fuel Agent? Yes it is. Is it possible to get this from Fuel power/tftp/dhcp management + Fuel Agent? Yes it is. So, I have two options right now: Ironic + Fuel Agent or Fuel power/tftp/dhcp management + Fuel Agent.

OpenStack-dev mailing list

OpenStack-dev mailing list

Reply via email to