On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 10:20 AM, Ed Leafe <[email protected]> wrote: > On Aug 25, 2016, at 3:19 PM, Andrew Laski <[email protected]> wrote: > > > One other thing to note is that while a flavor constrains how much local > > disk is used it does not constrain volume size at all. So a user can > > specify an ephemeral/swap disk <= to what the flavor provides but can > > have an arbitrary sized root disk if it's a remote volume. > > This kind of goes to the heart of the argument against flavors being the > sole source of truth for a request. As cloud evolves, we keep packing more > and more stuff into a concept that was originally meant to only divide up > resources that came bundled together (CPU, RAM, and local disk). This > hasn’t been a good solution for years, and the sooner we start accepting > that a request can be much more complex than a flavor can adequately > express, the better. > > If we have decided that remote volumes are a good thing (I don’t think > there’s any argument there), then we should treat that part of the request > as being as fundamental as a flavor. We need to make the scheduler smarter > so that it doesn’t rely on flavor as being the only source of truth. > +1
> > The first step to improving Nova is admitting we have a problem. :) > > > -- Ed Leafe > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: [email protected]?subject:unsubscribe > http://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
