Here's a link to my analysis so far: http://wiki.openstack.org/NovaOrchestration/WorkflowEngines/SpiffWorkflow
It looks good, but I won't pass a final verdict until I have completed a working project in it. I have one in progress and will let ya know when it's done. Z On 4/3/12 4:56 PM, "Ziad Sawalha" <[email protected]> wrote: >Just confirming what Sandy said; I am playing around with SpiffWorkflow. >I'll post my findings when I'm done on the wiki under the Nova >Orchestration page. > >So far I've found some of the documentation lacking and concepts >confusing, which has resulted in a steep learning curve and made it >difficult to integrate into something like RabbitMQ (for long-running >tasks). But the thinking behind it (http://www.workflowpatterns.com/) >seems sound and I will continue to investigate it. > >Z > >On 3/29/12 5:56 PM, "Sriram Subramanian" <[email protected]> wrote: > >>Guys, >> >>Sorry for missing the meeting today. Thanks for the detailed summary/ >>logs. I am cool with the action item : #action sriram to update the >>Orchestration session proposal. This is my understanding the logs of >>things to be updated in the blueprint: >> >>1) orchestration service provides state management with client side APIs >>2) add API design and state storage as topics for the orchestration >>session at the Summit >>3) add implementation plan as session topic >> >>Please correct me if I missed anything. >> >>Just to bring everyone to same page, here are the new links >> >>Folsom BluePrint: >>https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/nova-orchestration >>Folsom Session proposal: >>https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/nova-orchestration >>Wiki: http://wiki.openstack.org/NovaOrchestration (I will clean this up >>tonight) >> >>Maoy: Sandy's pointers are in this email thread (which n0ano meant to fwd >>you) >>Mikeyp: Moving the conversation to the main mailing list per your >>suggestion >> >>Thanks, >>_Sriram >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Dugger, Donald D [mailto:[email protected]] >>Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2012 12:52 PM >>To: Sriram Subramanian; Sandy Walsh >>Cc: Michael Pittaro ([email protected]) >>Subject: RE: [Nova-orchestration] Thoughts on Orchestration (was Re: >>Documentation on Caching) >> >>NP, I'll be on the IRC for whoever wants to talk. Maybe we can try and >>do the sync you want via email, that's always been my favorite way to >>communicate (it allows you to focus thoughts and deals with timezones >>nicely). >> >>-- >>Don Dugger >>"Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale >>Ph: 303/443-3786 >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Sriram Subramanian [mailto:[email protected]] >>Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2012 1:45 PM >>To: Sriram Subramanian; Sandy Walsh >>Cc: Dugger, Donald D; Michael Pittaro ([email protected]) >>Subject: RE: [Nova-orchestration] Thoughts on Orchestration (was Re: >>Documentation on Caching) >> >>I will most likely be running little late from my 12 - 1 meeting which >>doesn't seem to be ending anytime now :( >> >>I haven't gotten a chance to submit a branch yet. Hopefully by this week >>end (at least a bare bones) >> >>If you are available for offline sync later this week - I would >>appreciate that. Apologies for possibly missing the sync. >> >>Thanks, >>-Sriram >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: >>nova-orchestration-bounces+sriram=computenext....@lists.launchpad.net >>[mailto:nova-orchestration-bounces+sriram=computenext.com@lists.launchpad >>. >>net] On Behalf Of Sriram Subramanian >>Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 2:44 PM >>To: Sandy Walsh >>Cc: [email protected] >>Subject: Re: [Nova-orchestration] Thoughts on Orchestration (was Re: >>Documentation on Caching) >> >>Thanks for the pointers Sandy. I will try to spend some cycles on the >>branch per your suggestion; we will also discuss more tomorrow. >> >>Yes, BP is not far off from last summit, and would like to flush out more >>for this summit. >> >>Thanks, >>-Sriram >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Sandy Walsh [mailto:[email protected]] >>Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 11:31 AM >>To: Sriram Subramanian >>Cc: Michael Pittaro; Dugger, Donald D ([email protected]); >>[email protected] >>Subject: Thoughts on Orchestration (was Re: Documentation on Caching) >> >>Ah, gotcha. >> >>I don't think the caching stuff will really affect the Orchestration >>layer all that much. Certainly the Cells stuff that comstud is working on >>should be considered. >> >>The BP isn't really too far off from what we discussed last summit. >>Although I would give more consideration to the stuff Redhat is thinking >>about and some of the efforts by HP and IBM with respect to scheduling >>(mostly HPC stuff). Unifying and/or understanding those efforts would be >>important. >> >>That said, as with all things OpenStack, code speaks louder than words. >>The best way to solicit input on an idea is to submit a branch. That's >>the approach I'd take now if I had the cycles to put back into Orch. I'd >>likely build something on top of Amazon Workflow services (in such a way >>as it could be ripped out later) http://aws.amazon.com/swf/ The >>replacement could be a new OS Service with SWF as the api template. >> >>What I've been thinking about lately has been how to make a proof of >>concept operate with trunk side-by-side without busting the existing >>stuff. Tricky. Orchestration touches a lot of stuff. The error handling >>is OS could be an issue and unifying the 3 Enum State Machine on Instance >>could be nasty (Power, Virt & Task). >> >>I know Ziad is playing around with SpiffWorkflow so perhaps he might have >>some fresh insights? >> >>Hope it helps! Nice to see an effort still going on here. I think it's an >>important project! >> >>-S >> >> >>On 03/28/2012 03:08 PM, Sriram Subramanian wrote: >>> Hi Sandy, >>> >>> We wanted to understand the scheduler improvements in Essex so that we >>>can update Orchestration blueprint for Folsom. We also wanted to >>>identify the gaps in the current bp so that we can address them. >>> >>> Towards the understanding, Mike and Don suggested during last >>>Thursday's call that we understand the caching/ scheduler improvements >>>and be prepared for this week's call. >>> >>> Any pointers towards getting the Orchestration proposal right is >>>appreciated. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -Sriram >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Sandy Walsh [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 4:40 AM >>> To: Sriram Subramanian; Michael Pittaro; Dugger, Donald D >>> ([email protected]) >>> Cc: [email protected] >>> Subject: RE: Documentation on Caching >>> >>> Hi Sriram, >>> >>> What specifically are you looking for on Caching (and how would it >>>apply to Orchestration)? >>> >>> -S >>> >>> ________________________________________ >>> From: Sriram Subramanian [[email protected]] >>> Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 3:16 PM >>> To: Michael Pittaro; Dugger, Donald D ([email protected]); >>> Sandy Walsh >>> Cc: [email protected] >>> Subject: Documentation on Caching >>> >>> <Hope I am reaching the correct Michael> >>> >>> Michael - can you please point us to the updated documentation on >>>cachig (as per our meeting last Thursday), so that we can come prepared >>>this Thursday. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -Sriram >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >>-- >>Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~nova-orchestration >>Post to : [email protected] >>Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~nova-orchestration >>More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >> >> >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack >>Post to : [email protected] >>Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack >>More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > >_______________________________________________ >Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack >Post to : [email protected] >Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack >More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
