On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 1:30 PM, Alex Huang <alex.hu...@citrix.com> wrote: > You can introduce your own dedicate apis to dedicate pods clusters and host > instead of jam them into update apis. > > --Alex
+1 > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Deepti Dohare >> Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 9:48 PM >> To: Alex Huang >> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods, Clusters, Hosts >> to a domain >> >> Hi Alex, >> As you said, dedication apis should be added as a part of plugin, but here my >> concern is , when we are dedicating a pod/cluster/host, I can use existing >> apis (eg. updatePod or updateCluster) . How will I do that in plugins? >> Please clarify. >> >> -Deepti >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: Alex Huang >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 10:11 AM >> > To: Deepti Dohare >> > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods, Clusters, Hosts >> > to a domain >> > >> > If anything I said doesn't make sense, don't hesitate to ask. >> > >> > --Alex >> > >> > > -----Original Message----- >> > > From: Deepti Dohare >> > > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 8:20 PM >> > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >> > > Cc: Alex Huang >> > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods, Clusters, >> > > Hosts to a domain >> > > >> > > Thanks Alex for pointing out. I will update the FS keeping your points in >> > mind. >> > > >> > > >> > > > -----Original Message----- >> > > > From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@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.doh...@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+Reso >> > > > > 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.kan...@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.me...@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.hu...@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.da...@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.si...@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.da...@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.si...@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.hu...@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.doh...@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.x...@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 > >
