I know there are some people upset with me questioning this feature so late in the development cycle, but I think people need to get over that. If there are concerns being raised in the community, and a feature is not released, it's completely valid for me to ask questions and be unsure about this feature being released after all.
Leaving that argument aside, I want to understand how useful this is, because it introduces a bit of complexity into Cinder, that I'm not sure is solving much. Ultimately OpenStack operators are going to use this feature, as it requires them to create these filters and weigher functions. So far, it appears only one operator has weighed in on this feature according to gerrit. Proposed Documentation: http://thing.ee/x/doc-20150210/content/driver_filter_weighing.html Spec: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/129330/11/specs/kilo/filtering-weighing-with-driver-supplied-functions.rst Now let me reiterate. I say it appears this feature is not solving much, because the documentation is so vague, and it just recommends me to consult a vendor for help. In my opinion, this is a red flag on a feature in OpenStack. If the feature is so complex that we can't give help in our own documentation, then I'm not sure if we're solving the problem the right way. It also introduces error prone issues into Cinder, assuming the OpenStack operator is going to invest time in writing for each storage backend deployed a filter and goodness function that will work. A common question people ask is why not solve this problem in the current filter scheduler Cinder has today. I'm sure there were debates about how that would work, but might be worth reconsidering another look if we're getting to this point. I would like to hear from the operators, who are ultimately going to be faced with this feature of how useful it would be for them. -- Mike Perez _______________________________________________ OpenStack-operators mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-operators
