incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ram Ganesh <Ram.Gan...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods, Clusters, Hosts to a domain
Date Wed, 16 Jan 2013 19:29:31 GMT
Saurav,

Good to see your concerns are addressed.

Regards,
Ram

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Saurav Lahiri [mailto:saurav.lahiri@sungard.com]
> Sent: 16 January 2013 23:24
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods, Clusters,
> Hosts to a domain
>
> Deepti,
> That's great. Thanks for addressing this concern.
>
> Saurav
>
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Deepti Dohare
> <deepti.dohare@citrix.com>wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> > Here is an updated PRD link for this feature:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/CLOUDSTACK/private-host-cluster-pod.html
> > I am updating the FS based on the updated PRD, will be sharing it
> soon.
> >
> > Saurav,
> > Please see comments inline..
> >
> > Thanks
> > Deepti
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Saurav Lahiri [mailto:saurav.lahiri@sungard.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 5:29 PM
> > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > Cc: Alex Huang
> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods,
> Clusters,
> > Hosts
> > > to a domain
> > >
> > > Deepti,
> > > From the functional spec it appears that domains that have been
> assigned
> > > dedicated pods/cluster/hosts will be restricted to only these
> dedicated
> > > elements.
> > > It appears to imply that domains can use either share or dedicated
> > elements
> > > but not both. Or can they use both types?
> >
> > [deepti] Based on the status of the flags (mentioned in the link),
> domain
> > can use dedicated or shared resources.
> > >
> > > A use case[ not an entirely hypothetical use case] where I see the
> > described
> > > behaviour might be a limitation is where a customer would like to
> have
> > both
> > > the offerings based on the type of their requirement. They would
> expect
> > > that shared environment would be less expensive than dedicated
> > > environment and they would want to continue hosting perhaps their
> > > test/dev environment on the shared environment. But for the
> business apps
> > > they would like to use the dedicated environment.
> > >
> > > With the current proposal do u think there is a way to achieve this
> and
> > > provide this is in a easy to use manner.
> > > Do we want to add a shared/dedicated flag with each vm instance
> creation
> > > the way Nitin had suggested.
> > > Just a thought to raise discussion around this use case.
> > >
> > > Thoughts??
> >
> > [deepti]  Thanks for the suggestion. We will have a dedication flag
> in
> > service offering,  which will let the user choose which resources he
> want (
> > dedicated or non-dedicated) which I think will handle the use case
> you have
> > mentioned.
> >
> > If there is no available resources with the domain having dedicated
> > resources, CloudStack  will allow the user to use non-dedicated
> resources
> > based on the global parameter "Implicit dedication flag".
> >
> > >
> > > Thanks
> > > Saurav Lahiri
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Deepti Dohare
> > > <deepti.dohare@citrix.com>wrote:
> > >
> > > > Thanks Alex for pointing out. I will update the FS keeping your
> points
> > > > in mind.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Alex Huang [mailto:Alex.Huang@citrix.com]
> > > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 7:09 AM
> > > > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods,
> Clusters,
> > > > Hosts
> > > > > to a domain
> > > > >
> > > > > Deepti,
> > > > >
> > > > > Your wiki has references to defunct wiki/bug tracking.  Please
> > > > > correct
> > > > that by
> > > > > moving those into the apache wiki/jira.
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't think the two FSes has enough details for review yet
> but
> > > > > based on APIs posted, I can see the way it is heading so I want
> to
> > > > > make some requirements on the direction.  Dedication is not an
> > > > > integral part of cloudstack.  This requirement means the
> following
> > things.
> > > > >
> > > > > - You should not add dedication as an integral part of the
> > > > > organization
> > > > units
> > > > > such as zone, pod, and cluster.  It should be in steps
> reflected in
> > > > > the
> > > > API.  For
> > > > > example, from an API standpoint, it should be
> > > > >         - admin adds a pod
> > > > >         - admin dedicates the pod to a domain
> > > > >         - admin enables pod.
> > > > > - UI can makes these three calls on behalf of the admin if you
> want
> > > > > to introduce a easy step.
> > > > > - You should add a plugin that adds dedication apis and
> implements a
> > > > > deployment planner interface.
> > > > > - In cloudstack's core code itself, you should modify the
> following
> > > > things.
> > > > >         - service offering should carry a planner name to use.
> > > > >         - deploy vm code should use the planner that's
> specified in
> > > > > the
> > > > service
> > > > > offering.
> > > > >
> > > > > --Alex
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Deepti Dohare [mailto:deepti.dohare@citrix.com]
> > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 11:33 AM
> > > > > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods,
> > > > > > Clusters, Hosts to a domain
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Based on the discussion, we have 2 separate features:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. Private pod, cluster, host
> > > > > > 2. VMs on hardware dedicated to a specific account Functional
> > > > > > specs for these 2 features are posted on  Apache CloudStack
> wiki:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/FS+for+VMs+on
> > > > > > +hardware+dedicated+to+a+specific+account
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Dedicated+Res
> > > > > o
> > > > > > urces+-+Private+pod%2C+cluster%2C+host+Functional+Spec
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is the first draft, and modifications will be done along
> the
> > way.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > Deepti
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: Hari Kannan [mailto:hari.kannan@citrix.com]
> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 10:30 PM
> > > > > > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods,
> > > > > > > Clusters, Hosts to a domain
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi Nitin,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please see inline
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hari
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > From: Nitin Mehta [mailto:Nitin.Mehta@citrix.com]
> > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 9:01 PM
> > > > > > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods,
> > > > > > > Clusters,
> > > > > > Hosts
> > > > > > > to a domain
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 27-Dec-2012, at 4:47 AM, Hari Kannan wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hi Alex,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > There is no requirement for the end user administer
the
> > > > > > > > hardware -
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regarding the OAMP, I believe the resources are still
> owner,
> > > > > > > > administered, maintained and provisioned by the root
> admin -
> > > > > > > > they are simply "reserved" for the said domain/sub-domain
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > But, what would the admin view of all the resources be.
> Lets say
> > > > > > > he has dedicated Pod P1 to domain D1 and Cluster C1 to
> domain D2
> > > > > > > and Host h1 to domain D3 then in this case how will his
> > > > > > > dashboard look
> > > > like ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hari: Perhaps, the issue is we have a single persona called
> > > > > > > admin that
> > > > > > seems
> > > > > > > to be a catch-all. This admin role is actually composed
of
> > > > > > > multiple roles - I
> > > > > > see
> > > > > > > the OAMP task as a provider side role - and hence no
> different
> > > > > > > than today from that perspective - i.e. the domain admin
> (which
> > > > > > > is the
> > > > > "consumer"
> > > > > > side
> > > > > > > role) need not have access to the provider side resources
-
> this
> > > > > > > might be a need for Hosting environments, but for a cloud
> > > > > > > service provider as well as private clouds, I don't know
if
> this
> > > > > > > is a requirement. I do agree that it would be a nice to
> have
> > > > > > > feature
> > > > though..
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regarding CRUD/Mice's question - I don't believe that
is
> the
> > > > > > > > intention -
> > > > > > For
> > > > > > > context, Mice wrote " but if further sub-domain is assigned
> a
> > > > > > > different pod then it cannot access its parent domain's
> pod. 2.
> > > > > > > Sub-domain and its child domains will have the sole access
> to
> > > > > > > that new pod. when child domain already has some VMs on
> parent
> > > > > > > domain's dedicated pod, is it allowed to assign a pod to
> the
> > > > > > > child domain? or the existing VMs will be migrated to
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > new pod?"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > However, I think of this feature more along the lines
of
> what
> > > > > > > > Saurav
> > > > > > wrote
> > > > > > > " Lets say that  the resources on the pod dedicated to
the
> > > > > > > child-domain are exhausted and resources on parent pod
are
> > > > > > > available. In this case will provisioning of vms for the
> > > > > > > child-domain happen on parent's pod. So essentially
> provisioning
> > > > > > > has a affinity for local pods if available. And if
> resources are
> > > > > > > not available on the local pod but available on the parent
> pod
> > > > > > > then use
> > > > that.
> > > > > Would it be good to configure this  affinity"
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am afraid affinity is not the right thing to configure.
> The
> > > > > > > child domain has
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > expectation and is paying for dedicating resources just
to
> > itself.
> > > > > > > If these resources exhaust we should definitely fail
> deploying
> > > > > > > his vm. Instead if we deploy it in its parent dedicated
> > > > > > > resources and still charge him premium
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > is not correct. We should set the expectations right.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hari: I'm open to either choice - dedication can be
> interpreted
> > > > > > > differently -
> > > > > > If I
> > > > > > > have some resources dedicated, no one else can touch it,
it
> > > > > > > doesn't mean I don't get anything more - my preference
is
> to use
> > > > > > > a global to indicate if I
> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > draw from parent pool or not, with the default choice of
> "yes"
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Also what will be the change in usage ? How will we be
> metering
> > > > > > > the end user here  with dedicated resources?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I also think we need to have a flag in the service offering
> > > > > > > asking the end
> > > > > > user
> > > > > > > if he/she wants to deploy vm on dedicated or shared
> resources.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hari
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > > From: Alex Huang [mailto:Alex.Huang@citrix.com]
> > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 9:48 AM
> > > > > > > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate
> Pods,
> > > > > > > > Clusters, Hosts to a domain
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Planners are also plugins.  It just means your dedicated
> piece
> > > > > > > > needs to
> > > > > > > implement a different planner.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We may need some cloud-engine work.  Prachi and I
talked
> about
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > idea
> > > > > > > to let the service offering contain the planner cloud-
> engine
> > > > > > > should use to deploy a vm.  You can explore that idea.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But this part is just action acl.  This is the easy
part.
> The
> > > > > > > > more difficult part
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > the read part.  How do you limit what they can access.
> That
> > > > > > > part you need
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > talk with Prachi about on her design.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Is there any requirement to let the end user administer
> the
> > > > > > > > hardware
> > > > > > since
> > > > > > > the hardware is dedicated to them?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > My problem right now is the list of requirements sent
in
> your
> > > > > > > > email is not
> > > > > > > enough.  We need to send out a list with regard to the
> following.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > - OAMP. This means (Operations, Administrations,
> Maintenance,
> > > > > > > Provisioning) of hardware/physical entities/capacities.
> Who is
> > > > > > > ultimately responsible for the OAMP aspects of the
> dedicated
> > > > > > > resources?  Is it the domain admin/system amdin/ or some
> new
> > role?
> > > > > > > Depending on this, your interaction with the new ACL work
> can
> > > > > > > range from low to high.  This needs
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > be clearly outlined in the requirements.
> > > > > > > > - CRUD operations.  This means (Create, Read, Update,
> Delete)
> > > > > > > > on virtual
> > > > > > > entities and physical entities.  How does dedication affect
> > > > > > > those
> > > > > operations?
> > > > > > > For example, questions asked by Mice in another email.
> Here,
> > > > > > > you need to gather up the list of virtual entities we have
> and
> > > > > > > specify what it means for that entities in terms of CRUD.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This is not a small feature.  Tread carefully.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --Alex
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > >> From: Prachi Damle [mailto:Prachi.Damle@citrix.com]
> > > > > > > >> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 2:59 AM
> > > > > > > >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > > >> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate
> Pods,
> > > > > > > >> Clusters, Hosts to a domain
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Comments inline.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> -Prachi
> > > > > > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > >> From: Devdeep Singh [mailto:devdeep.singh@citrix.com]
> > > > > > > >> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 4:16 PM
> > > > > > > >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > > >> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate
> Pods,
> > > > > > > >> Clusters, Hosts to a domain
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Some queries inline
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > >>> From: Prachi Damle [mailto:Prachi.Damle@citrix.com]
> > > > > > > >>> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 3:04 PM
> > > > > > > >>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > > >>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources:
Dedicate
> Pods,
> > > > > > > >>> Clusters, Hosts to a domain
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Planners and allocators work on a DeploymentPlan
> provided as
> > > > input.
> > > > > > > >>> The caller can specify particular zone, pod,
cluster,
> host,
> > > > > > > >>> pool etc., to be used for deployment.
> > > > > > > >>> So for enforcing the use of a dedicated pod,
caller can
> set
> > > > > > > >>> the podId in the plan and planners will search
under
> the
> > > > > > > >>> specific pod
> > > > > only.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>>> If a deploy vm request is from a user
belonging to a
> domain
> > > > > > > >>>> which has a
> > > > > > > >> dedicated resource, then setting the podid/clusterid
> etc.
> > > > > > > >> will
> > > > work.
> > > > > > > >> However, if I understand correctly there is a
> requirement
> > > > > > > >> that no user from outside the domain, should be
able
> >>to use
> > > > > > > >> the dedicated resource. They cannot be restricted
by how
> the
> > > > > > > >> planner is implemented right now. Should the avoid
list
> be
> > > > > > > >> used? But it doesn't seem like the
> > > > > > right
> > > > > > > use of the field.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Yes avoid set lets you set the zone,pods,clusters,hosts
> to be
> > > > > > > >> avoided by the planner. It can be used for this
purpose.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> There may be some changes necessary (like
accepting a
> list
> > > > > > > >>> of pods/clusters instead of single Ids) but
this design
> of
> > > > > > > >>> planners should let you enforce the use of
dedicated
> > > > > > > >>> resources without major
> > > > > > > >> changes to planners.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>>> Doesn't this mean that we are changing
the core
> cloudstack
> > > > > > > >>>> code to
> > > > > > > >> achieve dedicated resources features?
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> This change is not necessary; it is an optimization.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Also, another way is to add a custom planner say
> > > > > > > >> DedicatedResourcePlanner that will search for
only
> dedicated
> > > > > > > >> resources
> > > > > > > for the given account.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>> -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > >>> From: Devdeep Singh [mailto:devdeep.singh@citrix.com]
> > > > > > > >>> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 2:58 PM
> > > > > > > >>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > > >>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources:
Dedicate
> Pods,
> > > > > > > >>> Clusters, Hosts to a domain
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Hi Alex,
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> I assume some apis will be added for letting
an admin
> > > > > > > >>> dedicate a pod/cluster etc to a domain. This
can be
> > contained in a
> > > plugin.
> > > > > > > >>> However, for enforcing that a dedicated resource
is
> picked
> > > > > > > >>> up for servicing deploy vm requests from a
user;
> wouldn't
> > > > > > > >>> planners and allocators have to be updated
to take care
> of
> > this?
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> Regards,
> > > > > > > >>> Devdeep
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>>> -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > >>>> From: Alex Huang [mailto:Alex.Huang@citrix.com]
> > > > > > > >>>> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 7:21
PM
> > > > > > > >>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > > >>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources:
Dedicate
> Pods,
> > > > > > > >>>> Clusters, Hosts to a domain
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> Deepti,
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> As Chiradeep pointed out, you should get
in contact
> with
> > Prachi.
> > > > > > > >>>> You should plan on this after the ACL
change or you
> can
> > > > > > > >>>> help out on the ACL
> > > > > > > >>> change.
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> For this feature, you really need to think
about the
> stats
> > > > > > > >>>> collection side of this because you'll
need to provide
> a
> > > > > > > >>>> lot of warnings about being near capacity
so people
> can
> > > > > > > >>>> plan
> > > > accordingly.
> > > > > > > >>>> It cannot be a case of the dedicated resource
explodes
> and
> > > > > > > >>>> then they go and work on expanding it.
 So you should
> also
> > > > > > > >>>> talk with Murali about how to do alerts
in
> > > > > > > >>> his new notification system.
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> And then in your spec, you need to plan
out how to do
> this
> > > > > > > >>>> in a plugin architecture and not modify
the core code.
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>> --Alex
> > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > >>>>> From: Deepti Dohare [mailto:deepti.dohare@citrix.com]
> > > > > > > >>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012
4:32 AM
> > > > > > > >>>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > > >>>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources:
Dedicate
> Pods,
> > > > > > > >>>>> Clusters, Hosts to a domain
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> Hi Mice,
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> Once a new pod is dedicated to the
child-domain,
> > > > > > > >>>>> deployment of the new VMs will happen
only  in the
> new pod.
> > > > > > > >>>>> The existing VMs will keep running
on parent-domain's
> pod.
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> Do you have any other suggestion on
this.
> > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>> - Deepti
> > > > > > > >>>>>> -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > > >>>>>> From: Mice Xia [mailto:weiran.xia1@gmail.com]
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012
4:52 PM
> > > > > > > >>>>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated
Resources: Dedicate
> > > > > > > >>>>>> Pods, Clusters, Hosts to a domain
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> but if further sub-domain is assigned
a different
> pod
> > > > > > > >>>>>> then it cannot access
> > > > > > > >>>>> its
> > > > > > > >>>>>> parent domain's pod. 2. Sub-domain
and its child
> domains
> > > > > > > >>>>>> will have the sole access to that
new pod.
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> when child domain already has
some VMs on parent
> > > domain's
> > > > > > > >>>>>> dedicated pod, is it allowed to
assign a pod to the
> child
> > > > domain?
> > > > > > > >>>>>> or the existing VMs
> > > > > > > >>>>> will
> > > > > > > >>>>>> be migrated to the new pod?
> > > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > > >>>>>> mice
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >

Mime
View raw message