Excerpts from Ian McLeod's message of 2013-08-08 07:29:14 -0700: > On Wed, 2013-08-07 at 11:00 -0700, Clint Byrum wrote: > > Flexibility can also be looked at as complexity. Complexity in Nova > > is expensive in many ways. But just poking a few more holes into > > Nova via the API would be a simple and effective way to manage that > > complexity. Exposing some lower level things would get you the needed > > pieces for your iPXE setup, and Monitoring disk IO is what ceilometer > > does. Is there something else non-obvious that you need inside Nova? > > If Ceilometer can provide the disk IO data, and the Nova API can be > expanded to allow direct specification of a kernel, ramdisk _and_ kernel > command line for Xen PV (and ideally, any other backing hypervisor that > supports direct boot), then we'd likely have what we need to do this > outside of Nova. > > There may be some performance penalty that comes with adding an extra > "hop" when moving around kernels and ramdisks. (I'm guessing the path > would become origin -> glance -> compute node versus, potentially, > origin directly to compute node.) >
This hop penalty is already paid every time an image is booted for the first time on a compute host. OpenStack has a vested interest in making this as fast as possible. Another option is to look at what Ironic is doing to address the same problem. _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev