openstack team mailing list archive

["Dugger, Donald D" <donald.d.dugger@xxxxxxxxx>]

OS-FLV-EXTRA-DATA:  Do you really need a 17 character scope?  Your current scope (I assume it's a derivative of OpenStack Flavor Extra Data) is really just redundant info, we know it's extra data for a flavor since we're talking about the `extra_specs' table which is used for flavors.  I would think something like `disk:qos' would be sufficient, informative and succinct.

Naming consistency: I don't see a real problem here.  As long as a unique scope is used then the actual key names can be arbitrary.  Since they are limited to a specific scope there is no danger of overlap so no need for a naming convention.

Deletion issues:  You raise a good point and I think we should address this.  When a flavor is deleted any `extra_specs' entries for that flavor should be deleted also.  Not a major issue but it would avoid surprises where sale `extra_specs' could be associated with a new flavor that re-used an ID.

--
Don Dugger
"Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale
Ph: 303/443-3786

From: Vinay Bannai [mailto:vbannai@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2012 2:41 PM
To: Dugger, Donald D
Cc: Patrick Petit; Jiang, Yunhong; openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Subject: Re: [Openstack] [Nova] Instance Type Extra Specs clarifications

Yes, the intent has been to use something along the lines of
"OS-FLV-EXTRA-DATA:disk_qos"

This leads to another question which I saw being discussed earlier in the email thread. Are we looking for consistency in adding the extra specs? For the most obvious ones it may be worth while to come up with a standardized convention for the names.

I was looking at the code and it appears that the extra_specs and the instance_types creation don't have similar code flow. When you delete a instance_type that you created with extra_specs (using the set_key method in nova-manage), the extra_specs are not cleaned up. I would have thought that they should go away too, right? Unless I understood the concept of extra_specs wrong.

Vinay


On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Dugger, Donald D <donald.d.dugger@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:donald.d.dugger@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Well, Yunhong added the API to allow you to update the extra specs table so he should be able to give you the details on that (he's in China, he might not get back to you until next week).

Also, make sure you add a scope (where scope is a string followed by a `:' at the beginning of the key) to whatever key you are adding to the extra specs table, otherwise your key will create problems with some of the scheduler filters.

--
Don Dugger
"Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale
Ph: 303/443-3786<tel:303%2F443-3786>

From: Vinay Bannai [mailto:vbannai@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:vbannai@xxxxxxxxx>]
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2012 2:20 PM
To: Patrick Petit
Cc: Dugger, Donald D; openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>)
Subject: Re: [Openstack] [Nova] Instance Type Extra Specs clarifications

Hello all,

I am part of the SF south bay meetup group and trying to add a Disk I/O QoS feature which is based on the blkiotune in libvirt.
We would like to add flavor types in which we specify the blkiotune in the create flavor screen. After reviewing the discussions and some emails it appears that it makes sense to use the "instance_type_extra_specs" to add the blkiotune as a key/value pair instead of extending the "instance_type" table in nova db.

I am able to use nova-manage to create instance type and use "set_key" to add extra specs. The set_key seems to make a direct call to the db to insert the keys whereas the instance_type create takes the more traditional path through the flavomanage controller. However I notice that there is no documentation on how to add the extra_specs keys using a RESTful api. Is this something still in discussions?

Thanks
Vinay

On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 8:02 AM, Patrick Petit <patrick.michel.petit@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:patrick.michel.petit@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Hi Don,

I added a comment in https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1039386 regarding your point.
Best regards,
Patrick
2012/8/24 Dugger, Donald D <donald.d.dugger@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:donald.d.dugger@xxxxxxxxx>>

Patrick-

We've enhanced `nova-manage' to manipulate the `extra_specs' entries, c.f. https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/update-flavor-key-value,   You can add an `extra_specs' key/value pair to a flavor with the command:

                nova-manage instance_type add_key m1.humongous cpu_type itanium

And delete a key/value pair with the command:

                nova-manage instance_type del_key m1.humongous cpu_type

We're in the process of enhancing `python-novaclient' and Horizon with similar capabilities and hope to have them ready for the Folsom release.

Currently, there's no hook to set `extra_specs' through the `nova.conf' file, the mechanism is to dynamically add the `extra_specs' key/values after the administrator has created a flavor.

Currently, the keys are completely free form but there are some issues with that so that should change.  Checkout the bug:

                https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1039386

Based upon that bug we need to put some sort of scope on the keys to indicate which components a key applies to. I'm in favor of adding a new column to the `extra_specs' table that would explicitly set the scope but an alternative would be to encode the scope into the key itself, something like `TrustedFilter:trust' to indicate that  the `trust' key only applies to the `TrustedFilter' scheduler component.  Feel free to chime in on the BZ entry on how to specify the scope, once we decide on how to deal with this I'll create a patch to handle it.

--
Don Dugger
"Censeo Toto nos in Kansa esse decisse." - D. Gale
Ph: 303/443-3786<tel:303%2F443-3786>

From: openstack-bounces+donald.d.dugger=intel.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:intel.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [mailto:openstack-bounces+donald.d.dugger<mailto:openstack-bounces%2Bdonald.d.dugger>=intel.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:intel.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>] On Behalf Of Patrick Petit
Sent: Friday, August 24, 2012 7:13 AM
To: openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>)
Subject: [Openstack] [Nova] Instance Type Extra Specs clarifications

Hi,

Could someone give a practical overview of how configuring and using the instance type extra specs extension capability introduced in Folsom?

If how extending an instance type is relatively clear.

Eg.: #nova-manage instance_type set_key --name=<my.instancetype> --key <cpu_arch> --value <'s== x86_64'>

The principles of capability advertising is less clearer. Is it assumed that the key/value pairs are always declared statically as flags in nova.conf of the compute node, or can they be generated dynamically and if so, who would that be? And also, are the keys completely free form strings or strings that are known (reserved) by Nova?

Thanks in advance for clarifying this.

Patrick



--
"Give me a place to stand, and I shall move the earth with a lever"

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to     : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp



--
Vinay Bannai
Email: vbannai@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:vbannai@xxxxxxxxx>
Google Voice: 415 938 7576<tel:415%20938%207576>



--
Vinay Bannai
Email: vbannai@xxxxxxxxx<mailto:vbannai@xxxxxxxxx>
Google Voice: 415 938 7576