On 09/28/15 at 10:19am, Sean Dague wrote:
On 09/28/2015 10:11 AM, Andrew Laski wrote:
On 09/28/15 at 08:50am, Monty Taylor wrote:
On 09/28/2015 07:58 AM, Sylvain Bauza wrote:
<snip>
Specifically, I want "nova boot" to get me a VM with an IP address. I
don't want it to do fancy orchestration - I want it to not need fancy
orchestration, because needing fancy orchestration to get a VM on a
network is not a feature.
In the networking case there is a minimum of orchestration because the
time required to allocate a port is small. What has been requiring
orchestration is the creation of volumes because of the requirement of
Cinder to download an image, or be on a backend that support fast
cloning and rely on a cache hit. So the question under discussion is
when booting an instance relies on another service performing a long
running operation where is a good place to handle that.
My thinking for a while has been that we could use another API that
could manage those things. And be the central place you're looking for
to pass a simple "nova boot" with whatever options are required so you
don't have to manage the complexities of calls to
Neutron/Cinder/Nova(current API). What's become clear to me from this
thread is that people don't seem to oppose that idea, however they don't
want their users/clients to need to switch what API they're currently
using(Nova).
The right way to proceed with this idea seems to be to by evolving the
Nova API and potentially creating a split down the road. And by split I
more mean architectural within Nova, and not necessarily a split API.
What I imagine is that we follow the model of git and have a plumbing
and porcelain API and each can focus on doing the right things.
Right, and I think that's a fine approach. Nova's job is "give me a
working VM". Working includes networking, persistent storage. The API
semantics for "give me a working VM" should exist in Nova.
It is also fine if there are lower level calls that tweak parts of that,
but nova boot shouldn't have to be a multi step API process for the
user. Building one working VM you can do something with is really the
entire point of Nova.
What I'm struggling with is where do we draw the line in this model?
For instance we don't allow a user to boot an instance from a disk image
on their local machine via the Nova API, that is a multi step process.
And which parameters do we expose that can influence network and volume
creation, if not all of them? It would be helpful to establish
guidelines on what is a good candidate for inclusion in Nova.
I see a clear line between something that handles the creation of all
ancillary resources needed to boot a VM and then the creation of the VM
itself. I don't understand why the creation of the other resources
should live within Nova but as long as we can get to a good split
between responsibilities that's a secondary concern.
-Sean
--
Sean Dague
http://dague.net
__________________________________________________________________________
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 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
