| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 00:00 | |
| *** dims_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 00:27 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 00:28 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 00:28 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 00:33 | |
| *** dims_ has quit IRC | 00:33 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 00:54 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 00:54 | |
| *** sheel has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 01:26 | |
| *** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 01:41 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 01:56 | |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 02:00 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 02:07 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 02:21 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has quit IRC | 02:27 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 02:41 | |
| *** sdake has quit IRC | 03:01 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 03:57 | |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 04:01 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 05:08 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 05:58 | |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 06:02 | |
| *** pgreg has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 06:35 | |
| *** vilobhmm111 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 06:42 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has quit IRC | 06:44 | |
| *** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 07:06 | |
| *** persia has quit IRC | 07:15 | |
| *** bswartz has quit IRC | 07:15 | |
| *** olaph has quit IRC | 07:15 | |
| *** olaph has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 07:16 | |
| *** persia has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 07:18 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 07:58 | |
| *** belmoreira has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 07:59 | |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 08:03 | |
| *** vilobhmm111 has quit IRC | 08:03 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 08:04 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has quit IRC | 09:01 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 09:59 | |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 10:03 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 10:09 | |
| *** sdague has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 10:13 | |
| *** pgreg has quit IRC | 10:15 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 10:21 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 10:30 | |
| *** sdake has quit IRC | 10:38 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 10:39 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 10:40 | |
| *** dims_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 11:45 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 11:47 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 12:00 | |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 12:04 | |
| *** ninag has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 12:41 | |
| *** ninag has quit IRC | 12:46 | |
| *** ninag has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 12:51 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 12:51 | |
| *** bswartz has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 13:00 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 14:16 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 14:19 | |
| *** elmiko has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 15:48 | |
| *** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 16:31 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 17:07 | |
| *** belmoreira has quit IRC | 17:07 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 17:08 | |
| *** vilobhmm111 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 17:09 | |
| *** dims_ has quit IRC | 17:09 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has quit IRC | 17:11 | |
| *** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 17:15 | |
| *** sdake has quit IRC | 17:17 | |
| *** vilobhmm111 has quit IRC | 18:07 | |
| *** angdraug has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 18:20 | |
| *** angdraug has quit IRC | 18:30 | |
| *** belmoreira has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 18:38 | |
| *** belmoreira has quit IRC | 18:48 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 18:51 | |
| *** angdraug has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 19:03 | |
| *** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 19:35 | |
| *** sdake_ has quit IRC | 19:36 | |
| *** belmoreira has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 19:36 | |
| *** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 19:43 | |
| *** sdake has quit IRC | 19:45 | |
| *** sdake_ has quit IRC | 20:01 | |
| vilobhmm11 | hi | 20:04 |
|---|---|---|
| *** mc_nair has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 20:04 | |
| *** vilobhmm111 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 20:32 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has quit IRC | 20:34 | |
| *** dims_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 20:36 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 20:38 | |
| nikhil | hi | 20:42 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm111: DST starts, we've 15 mins | 20:42 |
| nikhil | 18 rather | 20:42 |
| vilobhmm111 | nikhil : so are we meeting at 2:00 then ? | 20:49 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm111: yes | 20:54 |
| nikhil | #startmeeting quotas-wg | 21:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Mon Mar 14 21:00:25 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is nikhil. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 21:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 21:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: quotas-wg)" | 21:00 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'quotas_wg' | 21:00 |
| nikhil | Courtesy quotas-wg meeting reminder: nikhil, vilobhmm, DuncanT, mc_nair, ninag | 21:00 |
| ninag | o/ | 21:00 |
| *** cshahani has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 21:00 | |
| vilobhmm111 | o/ | 21:01 |
| nikhil | Hello everyone! | 21:01 |
| vilobhmm111 | hi nikhil | 21:01 |
| nikhil | How's the DST treating you (whoever it affects)? :) | 21:01 |
| vilobhmm111 | haha may be the first day so didn;t realize it | 21:02 |
| DuncanT | Hi | 21:02 |
| mc_nair | hey | 21:02 |
| nikhil | I know I thought to have driven 4.5 hours from CLT-Bburg but then realized it was Sunday where DST starts so it was merely 3.5 hours starting at 12am | 21:02 |
| vilobhmm111 | okies | 21:02 |
| nikhil | fun DST experience! | 21:03 |
| nikhil | anyways, I added a few items to the agenda | 21:03 |
| * thingee lurks | 21:03 | |
| nikhil | now that we've a few folks online and lurking :D | 21:03 |
| * nikhil pokes thingee | 21:03 | |
| nikhil | #topic agenda | 21:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "agenda (Meeting topic: quotas-wg)" | 21:03 | |
| nikhil | #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/quotas-wg-meeting-agenda | 21:03 |
| vilobhmm111 | so about https://review.openstack.org/#/c/284454/ i have updated the patch with few comments…thinking more on the need for reservation..spoke with andrew laski on nova channel and i agree we can get rid of reservations overall | 21:03 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm111: let's get to that in a just a bit. sorry, I had a outline for today's meeting predetermined .. | 21:04 |
| nikhil | Sorry, I wasn't at the last meeting but saw the logs and they look pretty good. We are still pending on the discussion of service vs lib | 21:05 |
| vilobhmm111 | nikhil : sure.. | 21:05 |
| nikhil | I had a great F2F convo with sdague on that point in NYC last week. | 21:05 |
| DuncanT | Can you explain a bit about how you get rid of reservations on an async system? | 21:06 |
| ninag | How about quota as a micro service that each project can run? | 21:06 |
| vilobhmm111 | DuncanT : once nikhil is done will answer to your que | 21:07 |
| nikhil | awesome, thanks vilobhmm111 | 21:07 |
| DuncanT | Thanks | 21:07 |
| nikhil | SO, let's recap last meeting on the review front, these questions today and then go with action items follow up. I've kept the feedback discussion for the open discussion topic given the amount og time weget today. | 21:08 |
| nikhil | #topic recap from last meeting & review quotas | 21:08 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "recap from last meeting & review quotas (Meeting topic: quotas-wg)" | 21:08 | |
| nikhil | #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-meeting-cp/%23openstack-meeting-cp.2016-03-07.log.html#t2016-03-07T21:13:31 | 21:09 |
| nikhil | That's the ad-hoc meeting we'd but we don't have official logs unfortunately as we ran over in the on air hangout last week. | 21:09 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm111: floor is all yours on the follow up and the above questions | 21:10 |
| vilobhmm111 | nikhil :ok | 21:10 |
| vilobhmm111 | so if we think about nova flow might look like irc://irc.freenode.net:6667/#1. nova boot cli irc://irc.freenode.net:6667/#2. commit the irc://irc.freenode.net:6667/#of resource depending on request (source of truth being the quota.usages table) irc://irc.freenode.net:6667/#3. go to scheduling pick up a host to boot the instance on irc://irc.freenode.net:6667/#4. on nova-api side claim the commited resources in ir | 21:11 |
| vilobhmm111 | a. nova boot cli | 21:11 |
| vilobhmm111 | b. commit resource depending on request (source of truth being the quota.usages table) | 21:12 |
| vilobhmm111 | c. go to scheduling pick up a host to boot the instance | 21:12 |
| vilobhmm111 | d. on nova-api side claim the commited resources | 21:12 |
| vilobhmm111 | right now nova and all other projects have concept of reservation and then commit (or rollback) | 21:13 |
| vilobhmm111 | reservation is just a guarantee that (within a certain timeout) a particular req owns the resouce | 21:14 |
| vilobhmm111 | which is redundant imho | 21:14 |
| vilobhmm111 | why not just rely on quota_usages | 21:14 |
| vilobhmm111 | and make commit / rollback accordingly | 21:15 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm111: can you please elaborate more? | 21:15 |
| vilobhmm111 | does the team see any possible pitfalls with this design | 21:15 |
| nikhil | what is the difference in the race condition during the reservation vs quotas_usages ? | 21:16 |
| vilobhmm111 | a reservation id is created for every resource request | 21:16 |
| mc_nair | vilobhmm111: is the redundant part that we're splitting up reserved/in-use, but anytime we check the free resources we need to take the total (in-use + reserved)? | 21:16 |
| * alaski peeks in | 21:17 | |
| vilobhmm111 | alaski : hi | 21:17 |
| alaski | mc_nair: that's a big part of it | 21:17 |
| alaski | I was questioning the benefit of reservations vs just committing the usage optimistically up front | 21:17 |
| nikhil | I see and that's makes me curious .. | 21:18 |
| mc_nair | alaski: yea I was curious about that also. We did something similar with the most recent Cinder nested quota changes, where we did the reservations of "allocated" values up front (took it out immediately and rolled back if needed) | 21:18 |
| mc_nair | but we still had it using a reservation | 21:18 |
| nikhil | we've this option of either undercommit using reservation or overcommit using usages? | 21:18 |
| mc_nair | just not split into reserved/in-use | 21:18 |
| *** sdague has quit IRC | 21:19 | |
| alaski | mc_nair: gotcha. that can work, but I do wonder if we can take it further | 21:19 |
| vilobhmm111 | mc_nair : reserved/in_use/allocated all 3 needs to be considered | 21:19 |
| vilobhmm111 | imho | 21:19 |
| vilobhmm111 | alaski : ^^ | 21:20 |
| mc_nair | but the reservation-id part of it still seems useful, because otherwise how do you keep track of when to timeout a reservation and roll it back, or group updates to multiple project reservations into one unit that's rolled back / committed as one unit | 21:20 |
| mc_nair | vilobhmm111: considered as in decide if we need them at all? | 21:20 |
| alaski | vilobhmm111: the benefit of distinguishing reserved/in-use is what I'm trying to figure out | 21:20 |
| alaski | mc_nair: rather than timing out a reservation I was thinking along the lines of having usage tied to the consuming thing, and if that thing doesn't exist or gets cleaned up then the usage can be cleaned up | 21:21 |
| alaski | group updates is still a question mark | 21:22 |
| alaski | another way to put it might be don't time out the reservation, time out the consuming entity | 21:23 |
| mc_nair | alaski: ok, that's interesting. I don't have my head wrapped around how that'd actually work yet, but I'm slightly more following :) | 21:23 |
| vilobhmm111 | alaski : you have an example for it | 21:23 |
| vilobhmm111 | will help to understand better what you want to convey here | 21:23 |
| nikhil | ok guys, I think this needs a brainstorming session. While we do that, we need to move forward on some of the action items too and get the requirements from other projects that people might be itching to give as per last meeting logs. | 21:24 |
| mc_nair | we'd want to consider the nested quota design for that carefully, cause currently we're doing the grouped reservations | 21:24 |
| alaski | mc_nair: cool. I realize I'm raising more questions than proposing answers, but this seems like the right time to think a bit | 21:24 |
| mc_nair | nikhil: sounds good | 21:24 |
| mc_nair | alaski: makes sense | 21:24 |
| vilobhmm111 | nikhil : it surely does…alaski : +1 | 21:25 |
| nikhil | ninag: you can go first if you want | 21:25 |
| nikhil | #info action items follow up below | 21:25 |
| ninag | nikhil: in terms of the Auto Scaling for VMs? | 21:25 |
| nikhil | ninag: yes, abvout to ask | 21:25 |
| nikhil | did we get feedback from them yet? | 21:25 |
| nikhil | (heat/autoscaling use cases drivers) | 21:26 |
| ninag | Yes, I did talk with them..there are really no new requirements..since the policies are being built at thr PaaS layer | 21:26 |
| DuncanT | So the thing about reservations is that they go (time out) if the create creates | 21:26 |
| ninag | They are interested in APIs to query quotas and actuals | 21:26 |
| nikhil | ninag: I see, so sketching out an API first would help more? | 21:27 |
| ninag | Yeah | 21:27 |
| nikhil | excellent direction | 21:27 |
| nikhil | #action all: provide feedback on the API front for the quotas | 21:27 |
| nikhil | of-course, this ties into our discussion about service vs lib | 21:28 |
| nikhil | but let's comment a bit about our perspective so far on the spec | 21:28 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm111: you seem to have action item on migration plan | 21:29 |
| nikhil | not sure if you wanted to add anything to it today | 21:29 |
| vilobhmm111 | migration plan still brainstorming…will have an update by tommorow | 21:29 |
| nikhil | okay, we can say no-op for now | 21:29 |
| vilobhmm111 | yep | 21:29 |
| nikhil | anything else on the action item follow up? | 21:30 |
| vilobhmm111 | i was working on getting this need for reservation thing sorted out + addressing feedback + adding details about quota for PaaS related details. | 21:30 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm111: ++ | 21:31 |
| nikhil | we'd have a quick open discussion, couple of small things | 21:31 |
| nikhil | #topic open discussion | 21:31 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open discussion (Meeting topic: quotas-wg)" | 21:31 | |
| vilobhmm111 | few things which we should clarify imho #1. what this entity should be (lib/service) #2. reservtion or no reservation | 21:31 |
| nikhil | #starvote extend the meeting length to 1 hours? yes, no, maybe | 21:31 |
| mc_nair | yes | 21:31 |
| ninag | yes | 21:31 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm111: exactly | 21:31 |
| nikhil | #vote yes | 21:32 |
| vilobhmm111 | #vote yes | 21:32 |
| nikhil | anyone else? | 21:32 |
| nikhil | #endvote | 21:32 |
| nikhil | okay, I misspelled startvote hence bot did not pick up | 21:33 |
| nikhil | mc_nair: vilobhmm111 ninag should we continue for the rest of the hour today then? | 21:33 |
| ninag | Sure | 21:34 |
| mc_nair | nikhil: I'm fine with that | 21:34 |
| mc_nair | Are there any design sessions planned for quotas in Austin summit? | 21:34 |
| nikhil | silence would mean yes (for all) | 21:34 |
| nikhil | mc_nair: not yet, once TC gets elected they will review the x-prj topics | 21:34 |
| nikhil | we'd get the link to proposal soon-ish I think (usually up in the wiki) | 21:35 |
| nikhil | #info we are continuing the meeting to the full hour as there were no objections raised today's meeting | 21:35 |
| nikhil | A quick update to everyone, we'd a great talk from vilobhmm111 on quotas and scheduling as a hangout on air last week. It's got ton of views already so, I get a feeling that quotas is super important to openstack realm just that not everyone can/wants to impl. | 21:37 |
| nikhil | #link https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTFww2RH21c | 21:37 |
| *** vilobhmm111 has quit IRC | 21:37 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 21:37 | |
| nikhil | All in all, I think we're in the right time for impl quotas. | 21:37 |
| nikhil | Now about the right place: | 21:37 |
| nikhil | 1. service | 21:37 |
| nikhil | 2. library | 21:37 |
| ninag | Microservice? | 21:38 |
| vilobhmm11 | why ninag | 21:38 |
| nikhil | My discussion with Sean gave me a understanding that it being a library that defines a bare-bone quotas DB table for all projects to source in should be a good starting point. | 21:38 |
| nikhil | ok, let's add that | 21:38 |
| nikhil | 3. Microservice | 21:38 |
| ninag | It is not a full fledged service, and given that we want to define behavior with a backing db | 21:39 |
| ninag | Seemed like a good fit for a micro service.. | 21:40 |
| ninag | but am open..wanted to put it out there.. | 21:40 |
| nikhil | ninag: what would be the critical defining point for it being called a micro service? | 21:40 |
| ninag | In my mind, we are not providing quota as a service.. | 21:41 |
| ninag | it still exists in the context of another service (nova etc) | 21:41 |
| nikhil | haha, then so is glance :D | 21:41 |
| ninag | but is more than a library.. | 21:41 |
| ninag | :) | 21:41 |
| nikhil | ++ | 21:42 |
| nikhil | I got the similar feedback | 21:42 |
| ninag | Lets talk about what you were proposing...I think it is pretty similar | 21:42 |
| nikhil | but not necessarily defining it as a separate service | 21:42 |
| nikhil | ninag: right on | 21:42 |
| nikhil | (I wanted to let you-ninag go first on micro service as this should open a new dimension of thinking separate from what we've already discussed on others) | 21:43 |
| nikhil | On the feedback: | 21:43 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil, ninag : making it a service adss addional dependency about deployments issues etc as opposed to it being a lib | 21:43 |
| vilobhmm11 | micros-service we can think more | 21:44 |
| *** belmoreira has quit IRC | 21:44 | |
| nikhil | If we've a library that defines bare-bone structure for the quotas and has a backing of the tables that all projects should have on quotas. Similar to what oslo.db does on the models for DB tables. | 21:44 |
| vilobhmm11 | imho a lib with a db bare bones seems reasonable for what its purpose is | 21:45 |
| nikhil | Sourcing into the project tree and then implementing custom logic seems like a good plausibility. | 21:45 |
| vilobhmm11 | +1 | 21:45 |
| nikhil | OF course, DB migrations would 'a' if not 'the' pain point | 21:46 |
| vilobhmm11 | but that you would have irrespective of it being a service or a lib | 21:46 |
| vilobhmm11 | DB migrations | 21:46 |
| ninag | yup | 21:46 |
| nikhil | well sure, but not necessarily so distributed | 21:47 |
| vilobhmm11 | what do you mean by that nikhil : ^^ | 21:47 |
| nikhil | it's easier to source out than source in information, imho | 21:47 |
| nikhil | my presumptions being the DBs would be owned by this service and not by individual projects | 21:48 |
| nikhil | and the migration plans would be part and release of this service release cycle | 21:48 |
| ninag | nikhil: not sure I get you..even in the library model, i thought you talked of its being backed by tables | 21:49 |
| nikhil | for example, if nova and cinder were two projects using this new service | 21:49 |
| nikhil | the implementation for nova & cinder quotas and the increments of DB migration will be done as a part of this service | 21:50 |
| DuncanT | I'd suggest you're going to want to define a new table with a name not used by any project then drain the records across over time... you can't just copy data around during migrations anymore, due to live upgrades | 21:50 |
| nikhil | yeah, and the idea is that for a library it will be a DB model and not DB table provided by this library | 21:51 |
| ninag | Ah ok | 21:51 |
| nikhil | that way when to do the (live) upgrade is dependent on the prj | 21:52 |
| nikhil | so, I'm inclining towards a lib of that sorts | 21:52 |
| *** dims_ has quit IRC | 21:53 | |
| nikhil | code that maps to a generic table that defines: Resource R has Usage S and is Nested (N or not S) that has a limit L etc. | 21:53 |
| vilobhmm11 | lib should provide quota engine and the db model only | 21:54 |
| nikhil | R becomes instances for nova and volumes for Cinder | 21:54 |
| nikhil | (per se) | 21:54 |
| nikhil | Anyways, we've 5 mins and that was the feedback I'd. | 21:55 |
| nikhil | DuncanT: had a good question earlier that we'd prolly get to before next week's meeting and possibly more brainstorming. | 21:55 |
| vilobhmm11 | all this the grammer "Resource R has Usage S and is Nested (N or not S) that has a limit L etc." can be taken care by the quota engine which can be the main component of the quota lib(entity) | 21:55 |
| vilobhmm11 | ok so nikhil i think it will be better to start an e-mail thread | 21:56 |
| vilobhmm11 | what do other think ? | 21:56 |
| nikhil | Also, I wanted to ask quickly: Would people like to have a video conference session prior to summit? (~3 weeks from now) | 21:56 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: that's a good idea. Let's begin with that. | 21:56 |
| ninag | vilobhmn11, nikhil +1 to both | 21:57 |
| nikhil | Also, let's try to bring this spec up in next CPL meeting. I think we'd had good structure by then. | 21:57 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : yup | 21:57 |
| nikhil | Just so that I ack this question and get a sense if we're waiting for more brainstorm or not: | 21:58 |
| nikhil | "So the thing about reservations is that they go (time out) if the create creates - DuncanT" | 21:58 |
| DuncanT | If the create crashes | 21:59 |
| DuncanT | Is what I meant | 21:59 |
| nikhil | any takers? | 21:59 |
| vilobhmm11 | need to brainstorm this more | 21:59 |
| nikhil | DuncanT: IMO, that's what reservation wants to achieve but may not be what it does atm | 22:00 |
| nikhil | So, I think reservation should help for non-flat quotas -- something that folks have been quite worries about. Correct? | 22:00 |
| DuncanT | nikhil: That wouldn't entirely surprise me | 22:00 |
| DuncanT | What are non-flat quotas? | 22:01 |
| vilobhmm11 | non-heirarchical | 22:01 |
| vilobhmm11 | is what you meant nikhil right | 22:01 |
| vilobhmm11 | by flat | 22:01 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: eh, I think we need to get the terminology right there. | 22:02 |
| nikhil | I meant hierarchal flat (non-floating). | 22:02 |
| nikhil | sorry, and we're out of time... | 22:02 |
| nikhil | Thanks all for joining! | 22:02 |
| nikhil | #endmeeting | 22:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 22:02 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Mon Mar 14 22:02:49 2016 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 22:02 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/quotas_wg/2016/quotas_wg.2016-03-14-21.00.html | 22:02 |
| vilobhmm11 | thanks all for the feedback | 22:02 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/quotas_wg/2016/quotas_wg.2016-03-14-21.00.txt | 22:02 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/quotas_wg/2016/quotas_wg.2016-03-14-21.00.log.html | 22:02 |
| DuncanT | A glossary would be useful for sure | 22:02 |
| nikhil | I think we've 3 types atm: | 22:03 |
| *** ninag has quit IRC | 22:03 | |
| nikhil | 1. Simple (is what I'd like to call them) -- are non-hierarchal | 22:03 |
| nikhil | 2. Flat (hierarchal but not overcommitting) | 22:04 |
| nikhil | 3. Floating (hierarchal and overcommitting) | 22:04 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: does that terminology work? | 22:04 |
| vilobhmm11 | nope | 22:04 |
| nikhil | what am I missing? | 22:05 |
| vilobhmm11 | #1. Flat = non-hierarchal #2. hierarchal but not overcommitting #3. hierarchal and overcommitting | 22:05 |
| vilobhmm11 | imho | 22:05 |
| vilobhmm11 | the need for hierarchical multitenancy was to overcome the probles exposed by flat project namespace | 22:05 |
| vilobhmm11 | so we should not mix flat and hierachical together | 22:05 |
| vilobhmm11 | it will be confusing | 22:05 |
| nikhil | sure, what can we call the #2 and #3 ? | 22:05 |
| nikhil | Absolute and Relative ? | 22:06 |
| nikhil | we can do that on ML but then it will get trolled | 22:06 |
| nikhil | :D | 22:06 |
| vilobhmm11 | overcommit is not closely related to relative | 22:06 |
| vilobhmm11 | lets spell it out completely #2. hierarchal but not overcommitting #3. hierarchal and overcommitting | 22:07 |
| vilobhmm11 | or by next meeting we can come up with something better | 22:07 |
| vilobhmm11 | i can take ownership for that | 22:07 |
| mc_nair | overcommit meaning your setting the quota higher than the resources available for that part of the hierarchy? | 22:08 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: my thinking was that to identify if a resource can get space or not, it will need to relate to other sub-prjs resources | 22:08 |
| nikhil | mc_nair: yeah | 22:08 |
| nikhil | mc_nair: like for 10 you give 7 and 7 to 2 sub prjs (making it possibility of 14) | 22:08 |
| nikhil | it's like running airlines! :D | 22:08 |
| mc_nair | nikhil: got it. Thanks | 22:09 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: sure, we'd get names as spelling out completely is quite tough for F2F conversations and people will misunderstand things easily before, during & after the summit. | 22:10 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : sure | 22:10 |
| vilobhmm11 | lets do that..i should come up with a better naming by next meeting..infact will update spec | 22:10 |
| mc_nair | nikhil: and for that would we still force total of 10 with regards to the parent? So if sub proj A eats up 7, then subproject B can only get to 3? | 22:10 |
| vilobhmm11 | and we can see if that sounds ok..and rephrasee it if needed | 22:11 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: I couldn't follow you guys today with the reservation talk just because I don't get the terms correct. My personal preference is to come up with explicit grammar if possible into the spec. | 22:11 |
| nikhil | mc_nair: correct | 22:11 |
| nikhil | mc_nair: that's the optimistic part | 22:11 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : sounds like a good approach to me | 22:11 |
| nikhil | vilobhmm11: perfect! thank you! | 22:11 |
| vilobhmm11 | nikhil : np :) | 22:11 |
| mc_nair | nikhil: good to stay optimistic :) thanks | 22:14 |
| nikhil | mc_nair: haha, yeah. | 22:14 |
| *** mc_nair has left #openstack-meeting-cp | 22:16 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 22:26 | |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 22:39 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 22:50 | |
| *** smcginnis is now known as smcginnis_away | 23:08 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 23:21 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 23:27 | |
| *** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 23:43 | |
| *** sdake has quit IRC | 23:52 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!