> -----Original Message----- > From: Joseph Suh [mailto:j...@isi.edu] > Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 9:38 PM > To: Jiang, Yunhong > Cc: Dugger, Donald D; openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Subject: Re: One question on the compute_filter > > Yunhong, > > Thanks for your interest in our patch. The original purpose of the > instance_type_extra_specs is providing ability to specify any specs that > cannot > be enumerated at the nova coding time such as hardware-specific > requirements (like gpu) or any features in the future system (like python > version > 10). System administrator will populate necessary items at the time of > deployment as he/she wants. Current compute_filter is a relatively simple code > that compares the items in the instance_type_extra_specs with those in > capability. In our patch, we want to add more operators, not changing the > basic > behavior.
Joseph, thanks for clarification. > > The idea behind the compute_filter is that if items are specified in > instance_type_extra_specs, the filter makes it sure that all the requested > items are in the capability of the provisioned hosts. > > So, in your approach, if you already know items that is required such as > xpu_arch and want to ignore other items in the instance_type_extra_spec, one > way might be to create another filter that checks only those known items. But, The issue here is, if I create such another filter, then it possibly can't co-exist with compute filter :( --jyh > then, if there is a need to check another item or ignore an item in the > future, > the filter code needs to be modified. In our approach, it can be simply > added/deleted in database by system administrator. > > Thanks, > > Joseph > > ---- > (w) 703-248-6160 > (c) 571-340-2434 > (f) 703-812-3712 > http://www.east.isi.edu/~jsuh > > Information Sciences Institute > University of Southern California > 3811 N. Fairfax Drive Suite 200 > Arlington, VA, 22203, USA > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Yunhong Jiang" <yunhong.ji...@intel.com> > To: j...@isi.edu > Cc: "Donald D Dugger" <donald.d.dug...@intel.com>, > openstack@lists.launchpad.net > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 10:00:44 AM > Subject: One question on the compute_filter > > > > > Hi, Joseph > > I’m working on the patch for blueprints > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/update-flavor-key-value , to > add/delete the extra_specs for flavor through nova-manage. I’m still setting > up my environment to push the patch. > > > > However, when I was testing my patch, I noticed that compute_filter assume it > will handle all of the “extra_specs”. If it can’t find corresponding key in > the > capabilities, it will fail to pass the host. IMHO, this is a bit overkill. > For example, > currently the trusted_filter.py will use the extra_specs to check if > trusted_host > is required, that means compute filter and trusted filter can’t be used at the > same time. > > I think compute filter should define explicitly all keys that it takes care, > like > cpu_info, cpu_arch, xpu_arch, and only check the corresponding extra_specs > key/value pair? After all, extra_specs is not compute_extra_specs? > > I noticed the patch in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/8089/ , but seems this > patch will not fix this issue still. > > > > Any idea or suggestion? I’m glad to create patch if any conclusion on this > issue. > > > > Thanks > > --jyh _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
