nova-orchestration team mailing list archive

[Sriram Subramanian <sriram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks for the pointers Sandy. I will try to spend some cycles on the branch per your suggestion; we will also discuss more tomorrow. 

Yes, BP is not far off from last summit, and would like to flush out more for this summit. 

Thanks,
-Sriram

-----Original Message-----
From: Sandy Walsh [mailto:sandy.walsh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 11:31 AM
To: Sriram Subramanian
Cc: Michael Pittaro; Dugger, Donald D (donald.d.dugger@xxxxxxxxx); nova-orchestration@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Thoughts on Orchestration (was Re: Documentation on Caching)

Ah, gotcha.

I don't think the caching stuff will really affect the Orchestration layer all that much. Certainly the Cells stuff that comstud is working on should be considered.

The BP isn't really too far off from what we discussed last summit.
Although I would give more consideration to the stuff Redhat is thinking about and some of the efforts by HP and IBM with respect to scheduling (mostly HPC stuff). Unifying and/or understanding those efforts would be important.

That said, as with all things OpenStack, code speaks louder than words.
The best way to solicit input on an idea is to submit a branch. That's the approach I'd take now if I had the cycles to put back into Orch. I'd likely build something on top of Amazon Workflow services (in such a way as it could be ripped out later) http://aws.amazon.com/swf/ The replacement could be a new OS Service with SWF as the api template.

What I've been thinking about lately has been how to make a proof of concept operate with trunk side-by-side without busting the existing stuff. Tricky. Orchestration touches a lot of stuff. The error handling is OS could be an issue and unifying the 3 Enum State Machine on Instance could be nasty (Power, Virt & Task).

I know Ziad is playing around with SpiffWorkflow so perhaps he might have some fresh insights?

Hope it helps! Nice to see an effort still going on here. I think it's an important project!

-S


On 03/28/2012 03:08 PM, Sriram Subramanian wrote:
> Hi Sandy,
> 
>  We wanted to understand the scheduler improvements in Essex so that we can update Orchestration blueprint for Folsom. We also wanted to identify the gaps in the current bp so that we can address them.
> 
> Towards the understanding, Mike and Don suggested during last Thursday's call that we understand the caching/ scheduler improvements and be prepared for this week's call.
> 
> Any pointers towards getting the Orchestration proposal right is appreciated.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Sriram
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sandy Walsh [mailto:sandy.walsh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 4:40 AM
> To: Sriram Subramanian; Michael Pittaro; Dugger, Donald D 
> (donald.d.dugger@xxxxxxxxx)
> Cc: nova-orchestration@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: Documentation on Caching
> 
> Hi Sriram,
> 
> What specifically are you looking for on Caching (and how would it apply to Orchestration)?
> 
> -S
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: Sriram Subramanian [sriram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 27, 2012 3:16 PM
> To: Michael Pittaro; Dugger, Donald D (donald.d.dugger@xxxxxxxxx); 
> Sandy Walsh
> Cc: nova-orchestration@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Documentation on Caching
> 
> <Hope I am reaching the correct Michael>
> 
> Michael - can you please point us to the updated documentation on cachig (as per our meeting last Thursday), so that we can come prepared this Thursday.
> 
> Thanks,
> -Sriram
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>