On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 10:22 AM, Lahiru Sandaruwan <[email protected]>wrote:

>
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Nirmal Fernando 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 9:59 AM, Lahiru Sandaruwan <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> Ah.. We had a lot of discussions with you, Lakmal, Imesh, and Reka. What
>>> i had my mind was the final outcome. Sorry that i didn't remember...
>>>
>>> Anyway let's discuss the best solution here... :)
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 9:31 AM, Nirmal Fernando <[email protected]
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I brought the same concern out, in an offline discussion with you,
>>>> since cloud-controller no more decides the information on where the
>>>> instance would get spawned, it is best to keep those information in
>>>> Autoscaler.
>>>>
>>>> Please come up with a two separate config files and let's discuss them
>>>> here and come to a consensus.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You mean the cartridge.xml and partition.xml ?
>>>
>>
>>> I think cartridge.xml can be kept in the cloud controller.
>>>
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>>
>>>> Hint: You should think carefully, how to map these two effectively. :)
>>>>
>>>
>>> I felt like we do not need a mapping here. Do we?
>>> Basically cartridge.xml is having account details of IaaS providers,
>>> instance types etc(what we had before).
>>>
>>> partition.xml is defined in Autoscaler side and when the Autoscaler
>>> decides to spawn/ terminate instance, it will pass the complete "Partition"
>>> object with the request to cloud controller.
>>>
>>> Then CC just get the information and do the needful.
>>>
>>
>> Well, who selects the IaaS? It's the Autoscaler, right? In Cartridge
>> definition, you map image ids etc, per IaaS basis. Hence, you need a
>> mapping.
>>
>
> Yes, Of course we need a validation when the partition.xml is deployed. We
> have to check whether the defined IaaSes, Zones etc. actually there in the
> IaaS. We can have a simple API from CC for this. Autoscaler pass the
> "Partition" object and get it validated.
>

I think what we need is something just before the deployment, that is in
the partition creation time. Otherwise, it's a nightmare for the person who
configures partitions. I think we've already discussed about a tool to
create these partitions. We might need to get that in.


> So after the deployment, what Autoscaler see is just a set of partitions
> and it takes decision on them.
>
> Thanks.
>
>>
>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 12:51 AM, Lahiru Sandaruwan 
>>>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> I've been thinking on the cloud partitions definition in the system.
>>>>> Currently we plan to define them in Cloud Controller config and then in 
>>>>> the
>>>>> cartridge.xml as Reka also explained above.
>>>>> In this design, we have to use a cartridge.xml if we want to hot
>>>>> deploy. Also the new partition definition is limited to that cartridge.
>>>>>
>>>>> In a second thought i though of following design,
>>>>>
>>>>> Define cloud partitions in a separate xml file which is hot deployable
>>>>> inside Autoscaler. Then the 'partition' object is passed to Cloud
>>>>> Controller which has all the details to spwan the instance in correct
>>>>> partition.
>>>>>
>>>>> Here are the advantages over current plan.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>    - Definitions of cloud partitions are used in Autoscaler for
>>>>>    making the decision on the capacity planing and the deployment pattern.
>>>>>    - This will remove following limitation from the current design.
>>>>>
>>>>> Defined partition will be limited to a particular cartridge as we
>>>>> define it in a cartridge.xml in the current design.
>>>>>
>>>>>    - Here, all the partition definitions are deployed by the dev-op
>>>>>    role(or equal) of the client. So there is no point of limiting a 
>>>>> partition
>>>>>    definition to a particular cartridge.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thoughts please.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 12:40 PM, Reka Thirunavukkarasu <[email protected]
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Reka, it's good that you followed the same pattern we had in
>>>>>> Cartridge design. It's best if you can generate the XSD and validate the
>>>>>> definition, if not already done.
>>>>>> +1. Will generate and validate against XSD.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Question:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * Why we need both type and id?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> "id" introduced for a readability purpose. If it is redundant, then
>>>>>> we can get rid of the id and go ahead with the type.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * How the policy file and cartridge definition relates? Should one
>>>>>>> configure policy file and cartridge definition together?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>  Yah. Devop need to configure cartridge definition as well as the
>>>>>> policy file together. But still, according to my understanding, policy 
>>>>>> file
>>>>>> can be generic and independent from the cartridge definition. In this 
>>>>>> case,
>>>>>> we might not able to apply all the policies to all the cartridge
>>>>>> definition. So, it is Stratos Manger's responsibility to validate the
>>>>>> cartridge definition against the policy files and display the applicable
>>>>>> list of policies to a cartridge.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Reka
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>>> Reka
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Reka Thirunavukkarasu
>>>>>>>> Software Engineer,
>>>>>>>> WSO2, Inc.:http://wso2.com,
>>>>>>>> Mobile: +94776442007
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Best Regards,
>>>>>>> Nirmal
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nirmal Fernando.
>>>>>>> PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Reka Thirunavukkarasu
>>>>>> Software Engineer,
>>>>>> WSO2, Inc.:http://wso2.com,
>>>>>> Mobile: +94776442007
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> --
>>>>> Lahiru Sandaruwan
>>>>> Software Engineer,
>>>>> Platform Technologies,
>>>>> WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>>>
>>>>> email: [email protected] cell: (+94) 773 325 954
>>>>> blog: http://lahiruwrites.blogspot.com/
>>>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/lahirus
>>>>> linked-in: http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/lahiru-sandaruwan/16/153/146
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Nirmal
>>>>
>>>> Nirmal Fernando.
>>>> PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>>>> Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>>>
>>>> Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> Lahiru Sandaruwan
>>> Software Engineer,
>>> Platform Technologies,
>>> WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
>>> lean.enterprise.middleware
>>>
>>> email: [email protected] cell: (+94) 773 325 954
>>> blog: http://lahiruwrites.blogspot.com/
>>> twitter: http://twitter.com/lahirus
>>> linked-in: http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/lahiru-sandaruwan/16/153/146
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Best Regards,
>> Nirmal
>>
>> Nirmal Fernando.
>> PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
>> Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.
>>
>> Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --
> Lahiru Sandaruwan
> Software Engineer,
> Platform Technologies,
> WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
> lean.enterprise.middleware
>
> email: [email protected] cell: (+94) 773 325 954
> blog: http://lahiruwrites.blogspot.com/
> twitter: http://twitter.com/lahirus
> linked-in: http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/lahiru-sandaruwan/16/153/146
>
>


-- 
Best Regards,
Nirmal

Nirmal Fernando.
PPMC Member & Committer of Apache Stratos,
Senior Software Engineer, WSO2 Inc.

Blog: http://nirmalfdo.blogspot.com/

Reply via email to