Placement of instances on the host based on the operating systems
Placement of instances on the host based on the operating systems..
. Get the os_type from the image when instance is going for provisioning for the first time & create a seperate pool based on the os_type and put the best fit empty selected host into that pool.
. When another instance request comes for provisioning then it will get the os_type from the instance and scheduler will search the pool based on that os_type to check if any host is available in the pool.
. If the required os_type pool is found then scheduler picks up one best fit host from that pool & provisions the instance on that host .
. If required os_type pool is not found then it will create another pool for the os_type taking the next best fit empty host and provisions the instance on that host.
Blueprint information
- Status:
- Started
- Approver:
- Russell Bryant
- Priority:
- Undefined
- Drafter:
- Digambar
- Direction:
- Needs approval
- Assignee:
- Digambar
- Definition:
- Drafting
- Series goal:
- None
- Implementation:
-
Started
- Milestone target:
- None
- Started by
- Digambar
- Completed by
Whiteboard
Please see above description about this blueprint, I am waiting for final approval of this blueprint.
I think some more design detail is needed in this blueprint. The description describes a desired outcome, but not how this would be implemented in terms of new filters for the filter scheduler, or any other modifications needed. Can you please describe how you would build this with the filter scheduler? If needed, we can discuss it on the openstack-dev mailing list. --russellb
Hello Russellb,
I'll upload a design document with all the flow of packing-filter implementation. Yes, if needed we can discuss it on the openstack-dev mailing list.
--Digambar
Where should I upload my implementation flow doc ?
etherpad or a google doc seems to work for most people. Then just link it here.
---
I also think it's important to discuss the *why* - why is it important to you that your instances get scheduled this way? What benefits does it bring to you as an operator or to the users of your cloud? --- @markmc
why is it important to you that your instances get scheduled this way?
-- Actually if service provider wants to put all the Same os type instance (RHEL) into one host due to licencing cost then it will be reducing the cost for cloud privder in case of Host.
What benefits does it bring to you as an operator or to the users of your cloud?
-- As an operator/user of the cloud reduced the cost of paying extra money for licenced OS for seperate hosts.
If we put all the windows instances on the same host then ultimately customer have choice of reducing the cost for different host because all the licencing os provisioning cost is higher than other OS.
Considering above scenarios we assume this is good idea to bring one filter which will schedule the instances according to the os_type
-Digambar
deferred from icehouse-3 to "next": http://
Removed from next, as next is now reserved for near misses from the last milestone --johnthetubagu
I think some more design detail is needed in this blueprint. The description describes a desired outcome, but not how this would be implemented in terms of new filters for the filter scheduler, or any other modifications needed. Can you please describe how you would build this with the filter scheduler? If needed, we can discuss it on the openstack-dev mailing list. --russellb
Hello Russellb,
I'll upload a design document with all the flow of packing-filter implementation. Yes, if needed we can discuss it on the openstack-dev mailing list.
--Digambar
Where should I upload my implementation flow doc ?
etherpad or a google doc seems to work for most people. Then just link it here.
---
I also think it's important to discuss the *why* - why is it important to you that your instances get scheduled this way? What benefits does it bring to you as an operator or to the users of your cloud? --- @markmc
why is it important to you that your instances get scheduled this way?
-- Actually if service provider wants to put all the Same os type instance (RHEL) into one host due to licencing cost then it will be reducing the cost for cloud privder in case of Host.
What benefits does it bring to you as an operator or to the users of your cloud?
-- As an operator/user of the cloud reduced the cost of paying extra money for licenced OS for seperate hosts.
If we put all the windows instances on the same host then ultimately customer have choice of reducing the cost for different host because all the licencing os provisioning cost is higher than other OS.
Considering above scenarios we assume this is good idea to bring one filter which will schedule the instances according to the os_type
-Digambar
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)Please see above description about this blueprint, I am waiting for final approval of this blueprint.
I think some more design detail is needed in this blueprint. The description describes a desired outcome, but not how this would be implemented in terms of new filters for the filter scheduler, or any other modifications needed. Can you please describe how you would build this with the filter scheduler? If needed, we can discuss it on the openstack-dev mailing list. --russellb
Hello Russellb,
I'll upload a design document with all the flow of packing-filter implementation. Yes, if needed we can discuss it on the openstack-dev mailing list.
--Digambar
Where should I upload my implementation flow doc ?
etherpad or a google doc seems to work for most people. Then just link it here.
---
I also think it's important to discuss the *why* - why is it important to you that your instances get scheduled this way? What benefits does it bring to you as an operator or to the users of your cloud? --- @markmc
why is it important to you that your instances get scheduled this way?
-- Actually if service provider wants to put all the Same os type instance (RHEL) into one host due to licencing cost then it will be reducing the cost for cloud privder in case of Host.
What benefits does it bring to you as an operator or to the users of your cloud?
-- As an operator/user of the cloud reduced the cost of paying extra money for licenced OS for seperate hosts.
If we put all the windows instances on the same host then ultimately customer have choice of reducing the cost for different host because all the licencing os provisioning cost is higher than other OS.
Considering above scenarios we assume this is good idea to bring one filter which will schedule the instances according to the os_type
-Digambar
deferred from icehouse-3 to "next": http://
Removed from next, as next is now reserved for near misses from the last milestone --johnthetubagu
I think some more design detail is needed in this blueprint. The description describes a desired outcome, but not how this would be implemented in terms of new filters for the filter scheduler, or any other modifications needed. Can you please describe how you would build this with the filter scheduler? If needed, we can discuss it on the openstack-dev mailing list. --russellb
Hello Russellb,
I'll upload a design document with all the flow of packing-filter implementation. Yes, if needed we can discuss it on the openstack-dev mailing list.
--Digambar
Where should I upload my implementation flow doc ?
etherpad or a google doc seems to work for most people. Then just link it here.
---
I also think it's important to discuss the *why* - why is it important to you that your instances get scheduled this way? What benefits does it bring to you as an operator or to the users of your cloud? --- @markmc
why is it important to you that your instances get scheduled this way?
-- Actually if service provider wants to put all the Same os type instance (RHEL) into one host due to licencing cost then it will be reducing the cost for cloud privder in case of Host.
What benefits does it bring to you as an operator or to the users of your cloud?
-- As an operator/user of the cloud reduced the cost of paying extra money for licenced OS for seperate hosts.
If we put all the windows instances on the same host then ultimately customer have choice of reducing the cost for different host because all the licencing os provisioning cost is higher than other OS.
Considering above scenarios we assume this is good idea to bring one filter which will schedule the instances according to the os_type
-Digambar
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)
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)
Hi johnthetubaguy,
I already started the work for this, we will submit the design in the next week & we are targeting it for Juno. Yes, if you want I'll re-submit it to nova-specs.
--Digambar (23rd March 2014)
this is newly submitted blueprint for nova-specs
https:/
