Hi Suro, In my understanding, even other CoE might have service/pod/rc concepts in future, we may still want to distinguish the "magnum service-list" with "magnum coe-service-list".
service-list is mainly for magnum native services, such as magnum-api, magnum-conductor etc. coe-service-list mainly for the services that running for the CoEs in magnum. Thoughts? Thanks. 2015-07-29 17:50 GMT-04:00 SURO <[email protected]>: > Hi Hongbin, > > What would be the value of having COE-specific magnum command to go and > talk to DB? As in that case, user may use the native client itself to fetch > the data from COE, which even will have latest state. > > In a pluggable architecture there is always scope for common abstraction > and driver implementation. I think it is too early to declare > service/rc/pod as specific to k8s, as the other COEs may very well converge > onto similar/same concepts. > > Regards, > SURO > irc//freenode: suro-patz > > On 7/29/15 2:21 PM, Hongbin Lu wrote: > > Suro, > > > > I think service/pod/rc are k8s-specific. +1 for Jay’s suggestion about > renaming COE-specific command, since the new naming style looks consistent > with other OpenStack projects. In addition, it will eliminate name > collision of different COEs. Also, if we are going to support pluggable > COE, adding prefix to COE-specific command is unavoidable. > > > > Best regards, > > Hongbin > > > > *From:* SURO [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* July-29-15 4:03 PM > *To:* Jay Lau > *Cc:* [email protected]; OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for > usage questions) > *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [magnum][blueprint] magnum-service-list > > > > Hi Jay, > > 'service'/'pod'/'rc' are conceptual abstraction at magnum level. Yes, the > abstraction was inspired from the same in kubernetes, but the data stored > in DB about a 'service' is properly abstracted and not k8s-specific at the > top level. > > If we plan to change this to 'k8s-service-list', the same applies for even > creation and other actions. This will give rise to COE-specific command and > concepts and which may proliferate further. Instead, we can abstract > swarm's service concept under the umbrella of magnum's 'service' concept > without creating k8s-service and swarm-service. > > I suggest we should keep the concept/abstraction at Magnum level, as it > is. > > Regards, > > SURO > > irc//freenode: suro-patz > > On 7/28/15 7:59 PM, Jay Lau wrote: > > Hi Suro, > > Sorry for late. IMHO, even the "magnum service-list" is getting data from > DB, but the DB is actually persisting some data for Kubernetes service, so > my thinking is it possible to change "magnum service-list" to "magnum > k8s-service-list", same for pod and rc. > > I know this might bring some trouble for backward compatibility issue, not > sure if it is good to do such modification at this time. Comments? > > Thanks > > > > 2015-07-27 20:12 GMT-04:00 SURO < <[email protected]>[email protected] > >: > > Hi all, > As we did not hear back further on the requirement of this blueprint, I > propose to keep the existing behavior without any modification. > > We would like to explore the decision on this blueprint on our next weekly > IRC meeting[1]. > > > Regards, > > SURO > > irc//freenode: suro-patz > > > > [1] - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Containers > > 2015-07-28 > > UTC 2200 Tuesday > > > > On 7/21/15 4:54 PM, SURO wrote: > > Hi all, [special attention: Jay Lau] The bp[1] registered, asks for the > following implementation - > > - 'magnum service-list' should be similar to 'nova service-list' > - 'magnum service-list' should be moved to be ' magnum > k8s-service-list'. Also similar holds true for 'pod-list'/'rc-list' > > As I dug some details, I find - > > - 'magnum service-list' fetches data from OpenStack DB[2], instead of > the COE endpoint. So technically it is not k8s-specific. magnum is serving > data for objects modeled as 'service', just the way we are catering for > 'magnum container-list' in case of swarm bay. > - If magnum provides a way to get the COE endpoint details, users can > use native tools to fetch the status of the COE-specific objects, viz. > 'kubectl get services' here. > - nova has lot more backend services, e.g. cert, scheduler, > consoleauth, compute etc. in comparison to magnum's conductor only. Also, > not all the api's have this 'service-list' available. > > With these arguments in view, can we have some more > explanation/clarification in favor of the ask in the blueprint? [1] - > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/magnum-service-list [2] - > https://github.com/openstack/magnum/blob/master/magnum/objects/service.py#L114 > > -- > > Regards, > > SURO > > irc//freenode: suro-patz > > > > > -- > > Thanks, > > Jay Lau (Guangya Liu) > > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: > [email protected]?subject:unsubscribehttp://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 > > -- Thanks, Jay Lau (Guangya Liu)
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
