Re: [openstack-dev] [Magnum] Discuss mesos-bay-type Blueprint
In today's IRC meeting, the conclusion for now is that create a Marathon+Mesos bay without exposing any object to Magnum but enable end user operate Marathon directly. Thanks. 2015-06-03 9:19 GMT+08:00 Kai Qiang Wu : > Hi All, > > For mesos bay, I think what we should implement depends on user-cases. > > If users use magnum to create mesos-bay, what would they do with mesos in > following steps ? > > 1. If they go to mesos (framework or anything) directly, we'd better not > involve any new mesos objects, but use container if possible. > 2. If they'd like to operate with mesos through magnum, and it is easy to > do that, we could provide some objects operation. > > Ideally, it is good to reuse containers api if possible. If not, we'd > better find ways to mesos mapping(api passthrough, instead add redundant > objects in magnum side) > > > > Thanks > > Best Wishes, > > > Kai Qiang Wu (吴开强 Kennan） > IBM China System and Technology Lab, Beijing > > E-mail: wk...@cn.ibm.com > Tel: 86-10-82451647 > Address: Building 28(Ring Building), ZhongGuanCun Software Park, > No.8 Dong Bei Wang West Road, Haidian District Beijing P.R.China > 100193 > > > Follow your heart. You are miracle! > > [image: Inactive hide details for Hongbin Lu ---06/02/2015 06:15:44 > AM---Hi Jay, For your question “what is the mesos object that we w]Hongbin > Lu ---06/02/2015 06:15:44 AM---Hi Jay, For your question “what is the mesos > object that we want to manage”, the short answer is it > > From: Hongbin Lu > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > Date: 06/02/2015 06:15 AM > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Magnum] Discuss mesos-bay-type Blueprint > -- > > > > Hi Jay, > > For your question “what is the mesos object that we want to manage”, the > short answer is it depends. There are two options I can think of: > >1. Don’t manage any object from Marathon directly. Instead, we >can focus on the existing Magnum objects (i.e. container), and implements >them by using Marathon APIs if it is possible. Use the abstraction >‘container’ as an example. For a swarm bay, container will be implemented >by calling docker APIs. For a mesos bay, container could be implemented by >using Marathon APIs (it looks the Marathon’s object ‘app’ can be leveraged >to operate a docker container). The effect is that Magnum will have a set >of common abstractions that is implemented differently by different bay >type. >2. Do manage a few Marathon objects (i.e. app). The effect is >that Magnum will have additional API object(s) that is from Marathon (like >what we have for existing k8s objects: pod/service/rc). > > Thoughts? > > Thanks > Hongbin > > *From:* Jay Lau [mailto:jay.lau@gmail.com ] > * Sent:* May-29-15 1:35 AM > * To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > * Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [Magnum] Discuss mesos-bay-type Blueprint > > I want to mention that there is another mesos framework named as chronos: > *https://github.com/mesos/chronos* <https://github.com/mesos/chronos> , > it is used for job orchestration. > > For others, please refer to my comments in line. > > 2015-05-29 7:45 GMT+08:00 Adrian Otto <*adrian.o...@rackspace.com* > >: > I’m moving this whiteboard to the ML so we can have some discussion to > refine it, and then go back and update the whiteboard. > > Source: *https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/mesos-bay-type* > <https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/mesos-bay-type> > > My comments in-line below. > > > Begin forwarded message: > > *From: *hongbin <*hongbin...@huawei.com* > > *Subject: COMMERCIAL:[Blueprint mesos-bay-type] Add support for mesos bay > type* > *Date: *May 28, 2015 at 2:11:29 PM PDT > *To: *<*adrian.o...@rackspace.com* > > *Reply-To: *hongbin <*hongbin...@huawei.com* > > > Blueprint changed by hongbin: > > Whiteboard set to: > > I did a preliminary research on possible implementations. I think this BP > can be implemented in two steps. > 1. Develop a heat template for provisioning mesos cluster. > 2. Implement a magnum conductor for managing the mesos cluster. > > Agreed, thanks for filing this blueprint! > For 2, the conductor is mainly used to manage objects for CoE, k8s has > pod, service, rc, what is the mesos object that we want to man
Re: [openstack-dev] [Magnum] Discuss mesos-bay-type Blueprint
Hi All, For mesos bay, I think what we should implement depends on user-cases. If users use magnum to create mesos-bay, what would they do with mesos in following steps ? 1. If they go to mesos (framework or anything) directly, we'd better not involve any new mesos objects, but use container if possible. 2. If they'd like to operate with mesos through magnum, and it is easy to do that, we could provide some objects operation. Ideally, it is good to reuse containers api if possible. If not, we'd better find ways to mesos mapping(api passthrough, instead add redundant objects in magnum side) Thanks Best Wishes, Kai Qiang Wu (吴开强 Kennan） IBM China System and Technology Lab, Beijing E-mail: wk...@cn.ibm.com Tel: 86-10-82451647 Address: Building 28(Ring Building), ZhongGuanCun Software Park, No.8 Dong Bei Wang West Road, Haidian District Beijing P.R.China 100193 Follow your heart. You are miracle! From: Hongbin Lu To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" Date: 06/02/2015 06:15 AM Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Magnum] Discuss mesos-bay-type Blueprint Hi Jay, For your question “what is the mesos object that we want to manage”, the short answer is it depends. There are two options I can think of: 1. Don’t manage any object from Marathon directly. Instead, we can focus on the existing Magnum objects (i.e. container), and implements them by using Marathon APIs if it is possible. Use the abstraction ‘container’ as an example. For a swarm bay, container will be implemented by calling docker APIs. For a mesos bay, container could be implemented by using Marathon APIs (it looks the Marathon’s object ‘app’ can be leveraged to operate a docker container). The effect is that Magnum will have a set of common abstractions that is implemented differently by different bay type. 2. Do manage a few Marathon objects (i.e. app). The effect is that Magnum will have additional API object(s) that is from Marathon (like what we have for existing k8s objects: pod/service/rc). Thoughts? Thanks Hongbin From: Jay Lau [mailto:jay.lau@gmail.com] Sent: May-29-15 1:35 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Magnum] Discuss mesos-bay-type Blueprint I want to mention that there is another mesos framework named as chronos: https://github.com/mesos/chronos , it is used for job orchestration. For others, please refer to my comments in line. 2015-05-29 7:45 GMT+08:00 Adrian Otto : I’m moving this whiteboard to the ML so we can have some discussion to refine it, and then go back and update the whiteboard. Source: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/mesos-bay-type My comments in-line below. Begin forwarded message: From: hongbin Subject: COMMERCIAL:[Blueprint mesos-bay-type] Add support for mesos bay type Date: May 28, 2015 at 2:11:29 PM PDT To: Reply-To: hongbin Blueprint changed by hongbin: Whiteboard set to: I did a preliminary research on possible implementations. I think this BP can be implemented in two steps. 1. Develop a heat template for provisioning mesos cluster. 2. Implement a magnum conductor for managing the mesos cluster. Agreed, thanks for filing this blueprint! For 2, the conductor is mainly used to manage objects for CoE, k8s has pod, service, rc, what is the mesos object that we want to manage? IMHO, mesos is a resource manager and it needs to be worked with some frameworks to provide services. First, I want to emphasis that mesos is not a service (It looks like a library). Therefore, mesos doesn't have web API, and most users don't use mesos directly. Instead, they use a mesos framework that is on top of mesos. Therefore, a mesos bay needs to have a mesos framework pre- configured so that magnum can talk to the framework to manage the bay. There are several framework choices. Below is a list of frameworks that look like a fit (in my opinion). A exhaustive list of framework can be found here [1]. 1. Marathon [2] This is a framework controlled by a company (mesosphere [3]). It is open source through. It supports running app on clusters of docker containers. It is probably the most widely-used mesos framework for long-running application. Marathon offers a REST API, whereas Aroura does not (unless one has materialized in the last month). This was the one we discussed in our Vancouver design summit, and we agreed that those wanting to use Apache Mesos are probably expecting this framework. 2. Aurora [4] This is a framework governed by Apache Software Foundation. It looks very similar to Marathon, but maybe more advanced in nature. It has been used by Twitt
Re: [openstack-dev] [Magnum] Discuss mesos-bay-type Blueprint
Hi Jay, For your question “what is the mesos object that we want to manage”, the short answer is it depends. There are two options I can think of: 1. Don’t manage any object from Marathon directly. Instead, we can focus on the existing Magnum objects (i.e. container), and implements them by using Marathon APIs if it is possible. Use the abstraction ‘container’ as an example. For a swarm bay, container will be implemented by calling docker APIs. For a mesos bay, container could be implemented by using Marathon APIs (it looks the Marathon’s object ‘app’ can be leveraged to operate a docker container). The effect is that Magnum will have a set of common abstractions that is implemented differently by different bay type. 2. Do manage a few Marathon objects (i.e. app). The effect is that Magnum will have additional API object(s) that is from Marathon (like what we have for existing k8s objects: pod/service/rc). Thoughts? Thanks Hongbin From: Jay Lau [mailto:jay.lau@gmail.com] Sent: May-29-15 1:35 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Magnum] Discuss mesos-bay-type Blueprint I want to mention that there is another mesos framework named as chronos: https://github.com/mesos/chronos , it is used for job orchestration. For others, please refer to my comments in line. 2015-05-29 7:45 GMT+08:00 Adrian Otto mailto:adrian.o...@rackspace.com>>: I’m moving this whiteboard to the ML so we can have some discussion to refine it, and then go back and update the whiteboard. Source: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/mesos-bay-type My comments in-line below. Begin forwarded message: From: hongbin mailto:hongbin...@huawei.com>> Subject: COMMERCIAL:[Blueprint mesos-bay-type] Add support for mesos bay type Date: May 28, 2015 at 2:11:29 PM PDT To: mailto:adrian.o...@rackspace.com>> Reply-To: hongbin mailto:hongbin...@huawei.com>> Blueprint changed by hongbin: Whiteboard set to: I did a preliminary research on possible implementations. I think this BP can be implemented in two steps. 1. Develop a heat template for provisioning mesos cluster. 2. Implement a magnum conductor for managing the mesos cluster. Agreed, thanks for filing this blueprint! For 2, the conductor is mainly used to manage objects for CoE, k8s has pod, service, rc, what is the mesos object that we want to manage? IMHO, mesos is a resource manager and it needs to be worked with some frameworks to provide services. First, I want to emphasis that mesos is not a service (It looks like a library). Therefore, mesos doesn't have web API, and most users don't use mesos directly. Instead, they use a mesos framework that is on top of mesos. Therefore, a mesos bay needs to have a mesos framework pre- configured so that magnum can talk to the framework to manage the bay. There are several framework choices. Below is a list of frameworks that look like a fit (in my opinion). A exhaustive list of framework can be found here [1]. 1. Marathon [2] This is a framework controlled by a company (mesosphere [3]). It is open source through. It supports running app on clusters of docker containers. It is probably the most widely-used mesos framework for long-running application. Marathon offers a REST API, whereas Aroura does not (unless one has materialized in the last month). This was the one we discussed in our Vancouver design summit, and we agreed that those wanting to use Apache Mesos are probably expecting this framework. 2. Aurora [4] This is a framework governed by Apache Software Foundation. It looks very similar to Marathon, but maybe more advanced in nature. It has been used by Twitter at scale. Here [5] is a detailed comparison between Marathon and Aurora. We should have an alternate bay template for Aroura in our contrib directory. If users like Aroura better than Marathon, we can discuss making it the default template, and put the Marathon template in the contrib directory. 3. Kubernetes/Docker swarm It looks the swarm-mesos is not ready yet. I cannot find any thing about that (besides several videos on Youtube). The kubernetes-mesos is there [6]. In theory, magnum should be able to deploy a mesos bay and talk to the bay through kubernetes API. An advantage is that we can reuse the kubernetes conductor. A disadvantage is that it is not a 'mesos' way to manage containers. Users from mesos community are probably more comfortable to manage containers through Marathon/Aurora. If you want Kubernetes, you should use the Kubernetes bay type. If you want Kubernetes controlling Mesos, make a custom Heat template for that, and we can put it into contrib. Agree, even using Mesos as resource manager, end user can still use magnum API to create pod, service, and rc. If you want Swarm controlling Mesos, then you want BOTH a Swarm bay *and* a Mesos bay, with the Swarm bay configured to use th
Re: [openstack-dev] [Magnum] Discuss mesos-bay-type Blueprint
I want to mention that there is another mesos framework named as chronos: https://github.com/mesos/chronos , it is used for job orchestration. For others, please refer to my comments in line. 2015-05-29 7:45 GMT+08:00 Adrian Otto : > I’m moving this whiteboard to the ML so we can have some discussion to > refine it, and then go back and update the whiteboard. > > Source: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/mesos-bay-type > > My comments in-line below. > > Begin forwarded message: > > *From: *hongbin > *Subject: **COMMERCIAL:[Blueprint mesos-bay-type] Add support for mesos > bay type* > *Date: *May 28, 2015 at 2:11:29 PM PDT > *To: * > *Reply-To: *hongbin > > Blueprint changed by hongbin: > > Whiteboard set to: > > I did a preliminary research on possible implementations. I think this BP > can be implemented in two steps. > 1. Develop a heat template for provisioning mesos cluster. > 2. Implement a magnum conductor for managing the mesos cluster. > > > Agreed, thanks for filing this blueprint! > For 2, the conductor is mainly used to manage objects for CoE, k8s has pod, service, rc, what is the mesos object that we want to manage? IMHO, mesos is a resource manager and it needs to be worked with some frameworks to provide services. > > First, I want to emphasis that mesos is not a service (It looks like a > library). Therefore, mesos doesn't have web API, and most users don't > use mesos directly. Instead, they use a mesos framework that is on top > of mesos. Therefore, a mesos bay needs to have a mesos framework pre- > configured so that magnum can talk to the framework to manage the bay. > There are several framework choices. Below is a list of frameworks that > look like a fit (in my opinion). A exhaustive list of framework can be > found here [1]. > > 1. Marathon [2] > This is a framework controlled by a company (mesosphere [3]). It is open > source through. It supports running app on clusters of docker containers. > It is probably the most widely-used mesos framework for long-running > application. > > > Marathon offers a REST API, whereas Aroura does not (unless one has > materialized in the last month). This was the one we discussed in our > Vancouver design summit, and we agreed that those wanting to use Apache > Mesos are probably expecting this framework. > > 2. Aurora [4] > This is a framework governed by Apache Software Foundation. It looks very > similar to Marathon, but maybe more advanced in nature. It has been used by > Twitter at scale. Here [5] is a detailed comparison between Marathon and > Aurora. > > > We should have an alternate bay template for Aroura in our contrib > directory. If users like Aroura better than Marathon, we can discuss making > it the default template, and put the Marathon template in the contrib > directory. > > 3. Kubernetes/Docker swarm > It looks the swarm-mesos is not ready yet. I cannot find any thing about > that (besides several videos on Youtube). The kubernetes-mesos is there > [6]. In theory, magnum should be able to deploy a mesos bay and talk to the > bay through kubernetes API. An advantage is that we can reuse the > kubernetes conductor. A disadvantage is that it is not a 'mesos' way to > manage containers. Users from mesos community are probably more comfortable > to manage containers through Marathon/Aurora. > > > If you want Kubernetes, you should use the Kubernetes bay type. If you > want Kubernetes controlling Mesos, make a custom Heat template for that, > and we can put it into contrib. > Agree, even using Mesos as resource manager, end user can still use magnum API to create pod, service, and rc. > > If you want Swarm controlling Mesos, then you want BOTH a Swarm bay > *and* a Mesos bay, with the Swarm bay configured to use the Mesos bay using > the (currently developing) integration hook for Mesos in Swarm. > > Any opposing viewpoints to consider? > > Thanks, > > Adrian > > --hongbin > > [1] http://mesos.apache.org/documentation/latest/mesos-frameworks/ > [2] https://github.com/mesosphere/marathon > [3] https://mesosphere.com/ > [4] http://aurora.apache.org/ > [5] > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/28651922/marathon-vs-aurora-and-their-purposes > [6] https://github.com/mesosphere/kubernetes-mesos > > -- > Add support for mesos bay type > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/mesos-bay-type > > > > __ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?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: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [Magnum] Discuss mesos-bay-type Blueprint
I’m moving this whiteboard to the ML so we can have some discussion to refine it, and then go back and update the whiteboard. Source: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/mesos-bay-type My comments in-line below. Begin forwarded message: From: hongbin mailto:hongbin...@huawei.com>> Subject: COMMERCIAL:[Blueprint mesos-bay-type] Add support for mesos bay type Date: May 28, 2015 at 2:11:29 PM PDT To: mailto:adrian.o...@rackspace.com>> Reply-To: hongbin mailto:hongbin...@huawei.com>> Blueprint changed by hongbin: Whiteboard set to: I did a preliminary research on possible implementations. I think this BP can be implemented in two steps. 1. Develop a heat template for provisioning mesos cluster. 2. Implement a magnum conductor for managing the mesos cluster. Agreed, thanks for filing this blueprint! First, I want to emphasis that mesos is not a service (It looks like a library). Therefore, mesos doesn't have web API, and most users don't use mesos directly. Instead, they use a mesos framework that is on top of mesos. Therefore, a mesos bay needs to have a mesos framework pre- configured so that magnum can talk to the framework to manage the bay. There are several framework choices. Below is a list of frameworks that look like a fit (in my opinion). A exhaustive list of framework can be found here [1]. 1. Marathon [2] This is a framework controlled by a company (mesosphere [3]). It is open source through. It supports running app on clusters of docker containers. It is probably the most widely-used mesos framework for long-running application. Marathon offers a REST API, whereas Aroura does not (unless one has materialized in the last month). This was the one we discussed in our Vancouver design summit, and we agreed that those wanting to use Apache Mesos are probably expecting this framework. 2. Aurora [4] This is a framework governed by Apache Software Foundation. It looks very similar to Marathon, but maybe more advanced in nature. It has been used by Twitter at scale. Here [5] is a detailed comparison between Marathon and Aurora. We should have an alternate bay template for Aroura in our contrib directory. If users like Aroura better than Marathon, we can discuss making it the default template, and put the Marathon template in the contrib directory. 3. Kubernetes/Docker swarm It looks the swarm-mesos is not ready yet. I cannot find any thing about that (besides several videos on Youtube). The kubernetes-mesos is there [6]. In theory, magnum should be able to deploy a mesos bay and talk to the bay through kubernetes API. An advantage is that we can reuse the kubernetes conductor. A disadvantage is that it is not a 'mesos' way to manage containers. Users from mesos community are probably more comfortable to manage containers through Marathon/Aurora. If you want Kubernetes, you should use the Kubernetes bay type. If you want Kubernetes controlling Mesos, make a custom Heat template for that, and we can put it into contrib. If you want Swarm controlling Mesos, then you want BOTH a Swarm bay *and* a Mesos bay, with the Swarm bay configured to use the Mesos bay using the (currently developing) integration hook for Mesos in Swarm. Any opposing viewpoints to consider? Thanks, Adrian --hongbin [1] http://mesos.apache.org/documentation/latest/mesos-frameworks/ [2] https://github.com/mesosphere/marathon [3] https://mesosphere.com/ [4] http://aurora.apache.org/ [5] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/28651922/marathon-vs-aurora-and-their-purposes [6] https://github.com/mesosphere/kubernetes-mesos -- Add support for mesos bay type https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/mesos-bay-type __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
