openstack team mailing list archive

[Thierry Carrez <thierry@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

John Purrier wrote:
> And we are back to the discussion about orchestration... Given the
> flexibility of the OpenStack system and the goals of independently
> horizontally scaling services I think we will need to address this head on.
> #3 is the most difficult, but is also the right answer for the project as we
> look forward to adding functionality/services to the mix. This is also where
> we can make good use of asynchronous event publication interfaces within
> services to ensure maximum efficiency.

I can see the need for a supervisor component that will make sure that
all needed resources/nodes are correctly called (currently only
network+compute, but potentially more with higher-level requests using
extra services).

In the case of #3, could you explain what would be left for the
scheduler to do ? Would it just pick the supervisor node, or just the
compute node, or both ? Just trying to make sure there is a real benefit
in the added complexity and that #2 is really a worse option.

Regards,

-- 
Thierry Carrez (ttx)
Release Manager, OpenStack