I think we got it all wrong! :( I was thinking my head-off and finally
found the correct relationship.

The actual validation of a deployment policy can only be made when we
display the policies per a cartridge. System could have all sorts of
policies but we should only allow subscriptions for valid policies of a
given Cartridge (Since, it's the Cartridge which defines the IaaSes it
could handle, it's not possible to validate before that).


On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Lahiru Sandaruwan <[email protected]>wrote:

>
>
>
> On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 11:59 AM, Nirmal Fernando 
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Lahiru Sandaruwan <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Nirmal Fernando <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Exactly, i was trying to say the same. Validation should happen at the
>>> deployment time and let the person who configure/ deploy them whether it
>>> was successful. I mean if the validation fails, deployment should fail.
>>>
>>
>> What I meant was to not let anyone define invalid partition, by enforcing
>> the partition definition via a tool.
>>
>
> Ahh. Ok..
>
> What i had in my was to let the dev-op(or similar person) deploy all the
> xmls manually as file in the serves.
> But later we will provide the facility to deploy them from GUI.
>
> Is that what you mean or a different tool? If so have we discussed on such
> a tool in dev(sorry if i have missed)?
>
> Thanks.
>
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>  I think we've already discussed about a tool to create these
>>>> partitions. We might need to get that in.
>>>>
>>>
>>> +1.
>>>
>>>  Thanks.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 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/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> 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