Enable nova use filters/weight from oslo
Now in oslo, we already put some scheduler filters/weights logic there and cinder is using oslo scheduler filters/weights logic, seems we want both nova&cinder use this logic in future.
It is better to enable nova use filter/weight logic from oslo and also use entry point to handle all filters/weight logic.
We can first sync from oslo with following filteres/weights:
1) availablity_
2) capabilities_
3) extra_specs_ops.py
4) json_filter.py
5) retry_filter.py
6) base_filter.py
7) base_handle.py
8) base_weight.py
The last work item is enable nova use entry point to handle scheduler filters/weights.
Blueprint information
- Status:
- Started
- Approver:
- Russell Bryant
- Priority:
- Undefined
- Drafter:
- None
- Direction:
- Needs approval
- Assignee:
- Guangya Liu (Jay Lau)
- Definition:
- Drafting
- Series goal:
- None
- Implementation:
-
Started
- Milestone target:
- None
- Started by
- Guangya Liu (Jay Lau)
- Completed by
Related branches
Related bugs
Sprints
Whiteboard
@jay-lau-513 The question in my mind is: if there is only one scheduler in OpenStack, not a separate one in Nova and Cinder, then what's the value of pulling common code into Oslo? The code in Oslo will be used by only one project. --alaski
I'm not sure I see the benefit of filters/weights in oslo with the move to Gantt. Ultimately Nova and Cinder can share a scheduler rather than sharing common code in two separate schedulers. Is there something I'm missing? --alaski
@alaski: I do agree with you. I do not see the benefit of this blueprint when Gantt is aready going on. --aloga
@aloga,do you mean we need do this in Gantt?
I cannot see the benefit of first syncing the code from nova to oslo (since the scheduler in oslo is obsolete), then to gantt, when gantt has already begun and it has forklifted the code from nova (and it is being kept in sync with nova). -- aloga
@aloga, scheduler in oslo is obsolate? Where can I get some info for this? We do not need to maintain scheduler in Oslo even for some common util? The final goal of this bp is enable nova scheduler or Gantt using entry point to manage filters and weights as it is more flexible.
@Andrew, my original thinking is that we can directly enable Gantt scheduler use oslo utils, but as now Gantt is not ready for such code change so what I want to do is first do this in nova and then sync up to Gantt as most of the code in Gantt are get from nova. What do you think. --jay-lau-513
Deferred to icehouse-3 as the blueprint was not approved by the icehouse-2 blueprint approval deadline. --russellb
You say "Move all filter logic to nova/openstack/
@Russell, I have updated the bp, please help check. Thanks. --jay-lau-513
I think you should take into account this BP https:/
In principle I like the idea, but it would be good to see what the impact will be, maybe some code showing the direction will help review this? --johnthetubaguy
With Icehouse-1 just over two weeks away (December 5th), moving this to Icehouse-2 since it hasn't been started yet. If it does get into Icehouse-1, we can re-target the BP. --jogo
Thanks John and Joe. i'm OK to set the milestone to i-2. Will provide patch later for your review. --jay-lau-513
Will this BP collide with https:/
Seems not much relationship, https:/
@Russell, do you think that we need to proceed on nova or move to gantt? For long term, I think that I can proceed this to gantt and leave nova as it is. Thanks. --jay-lau-513
Gerrit topic: https:/
Addressed by: https:/
Split AvailabilityZon
This bp depends on some oslo change: https:/
Addressed by: https:/
Enable nova scheduler use entry point for weight
Addressed by: https:/
Change weight_multiplier() to _weight_
deferred from icehouse-3 to "next": http://
Removed from next, as next is now reserved for near misses from the last milestone --johnthetubagu
I'm not sure I see the benefit of filters/weights in oslo with the move to Gantt. Ultimately Nova and Cinder can share a scheduler rather than sharing common code in two separate schedulers. Is there something I'm missing? --alaski
@alaski: I do agree with you. I do not see the benefit of this blueprint when Gantt is aready going on. --aloga
@aloga,do you mean we need do this in Gantt?
I cannot see the benefit of first syncing the code from nova to oslo (since the scheduler in oslo is obsolete), then to gantt, when gantt has already begun and it has forklifted the code from nova (and it is being kept in sync with nova). -- aloga
@aloga, scheduler in oslo is obsolate? Where can I get some info for this? We do not need to maintain scheduler in Oslo even for some common util? The final goal of this bp is enable nova scheduler or Gantt using entry point to manage filters and weights as it is more flexible.
@Andrew, my original thinking is that we can directly enable Gantt scheduler use oslo utils, but as now Gantt is not ready for such code change so what I want to do is first do this in nova and then sync up to Gantt as most of the code in Gantt are get from nova. What do you think. --jay-lau-513
Deferred to icehouse-3 as the blueprint was not approved by the icehouse-2 blueprint approval deadline. --russellb
You say "Move all filter logic to nova/openstack/
@Russell, I have updated the bp, please help check. Thanks. --jay-lau-513
I think you should take into account this BP https:/
In principle I like the idea, but it would be good to see what the impact will be, maybe some code showing the direction will help review this? --johnthetubaguy
With Icehouse-1 just over two weeks away (December 5th), moving this to Icehouse-2 since it hasn't been started yet. If it does get into Icehouse-1, we can re-target the BP. --jogo
Thanks John and Joe. i'm OK to set the milestone to i-2. Will provide patch later for your review. --jay-lau-513
Will this BP collide with https:/
Seems not much relationship, https:/
@Russell, do you think that we need to proceed on nova or move to gantt? For long term, I think that I can proceed this to gantt and leave nova as it is. Thanks. --jay-lau-513
Gerrit topic: https:/
Addressed by: https:/
Split AvailabilityZon
This bp depends on some oslo change: https:/
Addressed by: https:/
Enable nova scheduler use entry point for weight
Addressed by: https:/
Change weight_multiplier() to _weight_
deferred from icehouse-3 to "next": http://
Removed from next, as next is now reserved for near misses from the last milestone --johnthetubaguy
Marking this blueprint as definition: Drafting. If you are still working on this, please re-submit via nova-specs. If not, please mark as obsolete, and add a quick comment to describe why. --johnthetubaguy (20th April 2014)
Work Items
Work items:
1) Split AvailabilityZon
2) Sync base filter logic from oslo to nova: INPROGRESS
3) Sync base weight logic from oslo to nova: TODO
4) Sync all filters from oslo to nova: TODO
Dependency tree
* Blueprints in grey have been implemented.
