fuel-dev team mailing list archive

[Sergii Golovatiuk <sgolovatiuk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi,

Let's create a blueprint. We may enhance UI and toss those values to
astute.xml.

~Sergii



On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Dmitriy Novakovskiy <
dnovakovskiy@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Andrey, Dmitriy
>
> I've just realized that CPU overcommitment setting is defined not for
> Controllers but for Compute nodes, and may differ on per-node basis. So,
> the 2nd "harm" example that I exposed a few emails ago (with failed and
> redeployed controller resulting in inconsistent overcommitment behavior) is
> irrelevant.
>
> With this in mind, 3rd example is even worse :)
>
> 3) User goes through architecture workshop and capacity planning exercise,
> decides on CPU overcommit rates he/she will use for OpenStack cloud. User
> deploys the cloud with, let's say, 20+ compute nodes. Now, w/o CPU
> overcommit setting on GUI, User will:
> - get a cloud that's inconsistent with decisions made during planning
> - be not aware of this - GUI did not point user to a need of specifying
> this setting
> - be frustrated and put under risk - if the cloud is deployed with real
> workloads the compute nodes will soon become over provisioned and
> unreliable due to default Fuel setting (prod KVM clouds often use
> super-soft overcommit setting, or no overcommit at all)
> - finally - *user will have to MANUALLY specify and maintain overcommit
> setting across 20+ compute nodes.*
>
>  Doesn't sound like a good UX from cloud lifecycle management app :) -
> Fuel will quickly be ditched in favor of config management tool.
>
> So, my proposal on CPU overcommitment setting is following:
>
> - Expose it in Wizard on hypervisor selection screen
> - To simplify things initially - implement the setting as a drop-down
> list, with 2 options:
> -- No CPU overcommitment (1:1)
> -- Light CPU overcommitment (3:1)
> -- Heavy CPU overcommitment (6:1) --- default setting in BOM calculator
>
>
> ---
> Regards,
> Dmitriy
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 1:23 PM, Andrey Danin <adanin@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> I think, we can add to openstack.yaml a special tag "advanced" to every
>> advanced parameter, and UI can hide all such parameters for every group
>> under the button "show more options". Also we can add the "expand all
>> hidden options" button at the top of the tab. I don't think it's hard to
>> implement.
>>
>> Let's wait an opinion of UI team.
>> On Jun 24, 2014 1:58 PM, "Meg McRoberts" <mmcroberts@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Jesse and others make a very good point.  The Settings screen has
>>> already become a real mess
>>> that needs to be split up and organized a bit.  I'm told that the
>>> serious restructuring should come
>>> after we implement the plug-ins scheme (currently planned for 6.0).  And
>>> each section definitely
>>> needs an "Advanced" section for configurations that aren't routine.
>>>
>>> So do we wait to restructure the "Settings" screen until the plug-ins
>>> scheme is implemented?  I
>>> think breaking it up into sub-sections would make it more usable in the
>>> meantime but I don't know
>>> if it's worth the effort to do that ahead of the plug-ins.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 2:23 AM, Jesse Pretorius <
>>> jesse.pretorius@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 23 June 2014 23:02, Dmitry Borodaenko <dborodaenko@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Adding a configuration variable that can easily be changed after
>>>>> deployment is completed into Fuel is a slippery slope, you risk
>>>>> spamming the already overcrowded Fuel settings page with dozens of
>>>>> trivial (and not so trivial) options from every OpenStack component.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> While I agree, the fact of the matter is that Fuel facilitates the
>>>> deployment of configuration to all nodes in the environment in a consistent
>>>> manner. This is essential to deploy a reliable and supportable environment.
>>>>
>>>> In order to maintain the simplicity of the UI, but also provide access
>>>> to OpenStack's customisable configuration, why not do something like add an
>>>> 'advanced' button into the UI. Under there, the additional options can be
>>>> provided, and things that are already 'Advanced' (like the scheduler, the
>>>> Ceph replication factor, etc) can move under the 'Advanced' button for each
>>>> section.
>>>>
>>>> An additional very beneficial feature in the Advanced section would be
>>>> to allow any arbitrary key-value pairs for any settings that a user may
>>>> wish to deploy into the configuration files for the appropriate system (eg:
>>>> nova.conf). The user can be warned that these will not be validated and
>>>> that they are used at the user's own risk. This can allow any number of
>>>> OpenStack underlying features to be used without requiring a specific UI
>>>> for it.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
>>>> Post to     : fuel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
>>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
>>> Post to     : fuel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
>> Post to     : fuel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>
>>
>
> --
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
> Post to     : fuel-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>