Hi, Reading through the thread I thought of adding following points which might be relevant to this discussion.
1) Related to the point of providing an abstraction for deploying apps to different form factors: OpenStack Solum is a project which allows deploying of applications starting from their source code. Currently we support following deployment options: (a) deploying app containers in a setup where nova is configured to use nova-docker driver (b) deploying app containers on a VM with one container per VM configuration (c) deploying app containers to a COE such as a Docker swarm cluster (currently under development) For (a) and (b) we use parameterized Heat templates. For (c), we currently assume that a COE cluster is already created. Solum has a feature whereby app developers can provide different kinds of parameters with their app deployment request. This feature is used to provide cluster creds with the app deployment request. The deployment option is controlled by the operator at the time of Solum deployment. Solum's architecture is such that it is straightforward to add new deployers. I haven't looked at Ironic so won't be able to comment how difficult/easy it would be to add a Ironic deployer in Solum. As Joshua mentioned, it will be interesting to consider different constraints (density, performance, isolation) when choosing the form factor to deploy app containers. Of course, it will also depend on how other OpenStack services are configured within that particular OpenStack setup. 2) Related to the point of high-level application description: In Solum, we use a simple yaml format for describing an app to Solum. Example of an app file can be found here: https://github.com/openstack/solum/blob/master/examples/apps/python_app.yaml We have been planning to work on multi-container/microservice-based apps next, and have a spec for that: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/254729/10/specs/mitaka/micro-service-architecture.rst Any comments/feedback on the spec is welcome. Lastly, in case you want to try out Solum, here is a link to setting up a development environment: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Solum/solum-development-setup and getting started guide: http://docs.openstack.org/developer/solum/getting_started/ Regards, Devdatta ________________________________________ From: Joshua Harlow <harlo...@fastmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2016 2:16 PM To: Flavio Percoco; OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Cc: foundat...@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack Foundation] [board][tc][all] One Platform – Containers/Bare Metal? (Re: Board of Directors Meeting) Flavio Percoco wrote: > On 11/04/16 18:05 +0000, Amrith Kumar wrote: >> Adrian, thx for your detailed mail. >> >> >> >> Yes, I was hopeful of a silver bullet and as we’ve discussed before (I >> think it >> was Vancouver), there’s likely no silver bullet in this area. After that >> conversation, and some further experimentation, I found that even if >> Trove had >> access to a single Compute API, there were other significant >> complications >> further down the road, and I didn’t pursue the project further at the >> time. >> > > Adrian, Amrith, > > I've spent enough time researching on this area during the last month > and my > conclusion is pretty much the above. There's no silver bullet in this > area and > I'd argue there shouldn't be one. Containers, bare metal and VMs differ > in such > a way (feature-wise) that it'd not be good, as far as deploying > databases goes, > for there to be one compute API. Containers allow for a different > deployment > architecture than VMs and so does bare metal. Just some thoughts from me, but why focus on the compute/container/baremetal API at all? I'd almost like a way that just describes how my app should be interconnected, what is required to get it going, and the features and/or scheduling requirements for different parts of those app. To me it feels like this isn't a compute API or really a heat API but something else. Maybe it's closer to the docker compose API/template format or something like it. Perhaps such a thing needs a new project. I'm not sure, but it does feel like that as developers we should be able to make such a thing that still exposes the more advanced functionality of the underlying API so that it can be used if really needed... Maybe this is similar to an app-catalog, but that doesn't quite feel like it's the right thing either so maybe somewhere in between... IMHO I'd be nice to have a unified story around what this thing is, so that we as a community can drive (as a single group) toward that, maybe this is where the product working group can help and we as a developer community can also try to unify behind... P.S. name for project should be 'silver' related, ha. -Josh __________________________________________________________________________ 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
