incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Vijay Venkatachalam <Vijay.Venkatacha...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: Integrating autoscale branch to master?
Date Thu, 15 Nov 2012 20:02:30 GMT
Simple answer yes, any LB device could do this.

It should be done in 2 parts 

The open source loadbalancer part, where the loadbalancer have to be modified, for example,
to monitor for autoscaling purposes ( in addition to the regular healthmonitoring).

The cloudstack part, in the loadbalancer's resource (in cloudstack), translate the autoscale
config to the config which the open source loadbalancer can understand.

Thanks,
Vijay V. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sebastien Goasguen [mailto:runseb@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2012 1:02 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Integrating autoscale branch to master?
> 
> 
> On Nov 15, 2012, at 5:44 PM, Ram Ganesh <Ram.Ganesh@citrix.com> wrote:
> 
> > Any thoughts? Unless we hear otherwise would like to push the patches.
> This feature had been code complete for a very long time. If there are still
> concerns/opinions let us know and we can take steps to correct them.
> >
> 
> Ram, any thoughts on how this could work without Netscaler ? Any
> alternative open source load balancer we could use to implement this ?
> 
> -Sebastien
> 
> > Thanks,
> > Ram
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Ram Ganesh [mailto:Ram.Ganesh@citrix.com]
> >> Sent: 15 November 2012 07:09
> >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >> Subject: RE: Integrating autoscale branch to master?
> >>
> >> David,
> >>
> >> Can we go ahead with merge of AutoScale code into master? Are there
> >> any more open questions?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Ram
> >>
> >>> -----Original Message-----
> >>> From: Vijay Venkatachalam [mailto:Vijay.Venkatachalam@citrix.com]
> >>> Sent: 13 November 2012 12:34
> >>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>> Subject: RE: Integrating autoscale branch to master?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> My replies inline
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Vijay V.
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: David Nalley [mailto:david@gnsa.us]
> >>>> Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 7:42 PM
> >>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>>> Subject: Re: Integrating autoscale branch to master?
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Vijay Venkatachalam
> >>>> <Vijay.Venkatachalam@citrix.com> wrote:
> >>>>> Ok I will keep changes ready, and will merge once 4.0's news is
> >>> declared.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -Vijay V.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Vijay,
> >>>>
> >>>> I haven't kept up with this recently so a couple of
> >>> questions/assumptions:
> >>>>
> >>>> 1. Autoscale code will require NetScaler libraries right?
> >>>
> >>> There are 2 parts to autoscale code.
> >>> A. AutoScale Manager and its services,  This is part of the core.
> >>> And has no No Netscaler jar dependency;  This part is coded like any
> >>> other NetworkServiceManager, meaning
> >> any
> >>> network
> >>>  element can provide autoscale service.  So this part does not have
> >>> compile time  dependency with NetScaler jar.
> >>>
> >>>  If an autoscale provider (which is most likely already an LB
> >>> provider) does not exist
> >>>  in that network an error is thrown at run time.
> >>>  So for all oss builds (where Netscaler is not packaged and cannot
> >> be
> >>> added
> >>>  to the infrastructure) we should get a run-time error when
> >>> configuring autoscale.
> >>>
> >>> B. NetScaler Element and Netscaler Resource (which is part of
> >>> non-oss build today)
> >>>     has been enhanced to provide autoscale capability. Today only
> >>>     NetScaler does this, in future any network element can he
> >> enhanced
> >>>     to provide autoscale. This part already has NetScaler jar
> >>> dependency
> >>>     (and is considered non-oss today)  and will continue to have
> >>> NetScaler
> >>>      jar dependency.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> 2. Is autoscale functionality modular enough that we can turn
> >>> building it
> >>>> on/off at will?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Short Answer, No.
> >>> Since AutoScale is like an addon to LB there are touch- points. For
> >>> example, when a LoadBalancerRule is deleted the AutoScale entities
> >>> created for it also should be deleted, hence the dependency.
> >>> Basically there is code in LB core to delete autoscale entities on
> >> the
> >>> loadbalancer
> >>> rule's delete path. Hence Part (A.) could not be modularized. Is
> >> there
> >>> an alternative here?
> >>>
> >>> Also, in the UI autoscale will appear as part of LB to the user and
> >> if
> >>> he attempts to configure
> >>> AutoScale in a network which does not have NetScaler; he will get a
> >>> run-time error.
> >>>
> >>>> 3. Has there been any change to the netscaler java library
> >> licensing?
> >>>> I know there was work underway, but I never heard about a
> >> conclusion.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I am still chasing the legal team on this, but for the moment, we
> >>> should continue to treat NetScaler as non-oss.
> >>>
> >>>> --David


Mime
View raw message