On 10/09/2014 03:36 PM, Duncan Thomas wrote:
On 9 October 2014 07:49, henry hly <henry4...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Joshua,
...in fact hierarchical scale
depends on square of single child scale. If a single child can deal
with 00's to 000's, cascading on it would then deal with 00,000's.
That is faulty logic - maybe the cascading solution needs to deal with
global quota and other aggregations that will rapidly break down your
There should not be Global quota in a cascading deployment. If I own a
cloud, I should manage my own Quota.
Keystone needs to be able to merge the authorization data across
multiple OpenStack instances. I have a spec proposal for this:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/123782/
There are many issues to be resolved due to the "organic growth" nature
of OpenStack deployments. We see a recuring pattern where people need
to span across multiple deployments, and not just for Bursting.
Quota then becomes essential: it is the way of limiting what a user can
do in one deployment ,separate from what they could do in a different
one. The quotas really reflect the contract between the user and the
deployment.
scaling factor, or maybe there are few such problems can the cascade
part can scale way better than the underlying part. They are two
totally different scaling cases, so and suggestion that they are
anything other than an unknown multiplier is bogus.
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
