You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by "Kelceydamage@bbits" <ke...@bbits.ca> on 2012/07/18 18:39:34 UTC
Re: system VM out of CloudStack
By "Will it be good idea to move that VMs out of CloudStack" do you mean onto separate infrastructure? As in a non-managed hypervisor, or bare-metal?
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 18, 2012, at 10:20 AM, dan@soleks.com wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> System VMs - SSVM and CPVM- both are critical components for CloudStack infrastructure, and as everybody probably noticed there are a lot of questions related to that VMs. Will it be good idea to move that VMs out of CloudStack, so they will be fully segregated from the cloud controlled by CS and from user's VMs. Eventually Cloudstack System will be - System Environment - Management Hosts (or VMs), SS Hosts (or VMs) and CP Hosts (or VMs) and Users Environment - Computational Hosts, VMs and Storage. Any thoughts about it ?
>
> Dan/borei.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
RE: system VM out of CloudStack
Posted by "Kelcey Damage (BBITS)" <ke...@bbits.ca>.
For me, it sounds like putting them on a separate service layer would be helpful, especially in highly custom environments.
I do like the thought of load-balanced system VMs.
Kelcey Jamison-Damage
Infrastructure Systems Architect
Backbone IT Service | Backbone Datavault | Backbone Technology
55 East 7th Ave Vancouver - BC Canada V5T 1M4
kelcey@bbits.ca | 604-331-1152 ext. 114
-----Original Message-----
From: Edison Su [mailto:Edison.su@citrix.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 1:36 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Kelceydamage@bbits
Subject: RE: system VM out of CloudStack
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dan@soleks.com [mailto:dan@soleks.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 10:56 AM
> To: Kelceydamage@bbits
> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: system VM out of CloudStack
>
> Agree, as any changes it will create some level of complexity - but
> question is - is that solution better then existing one ? Even for
> multi-zone deployment it's easier to keep separate pool of VMs of the
> same type, then to have deep hierarchy inside zone. In additional That
> system VMs (especially CPVM) can be behind loadbalancer, so it will be
> really beneficial for environment with big number of console sessions,
> and it can be scaled pretty easy.
Actually, we have internally talked about to move system VMs(secondary storage vm, console proxy vm, router vm, even the API server) to a separate service layer.
CloudStack core will be an Orchestration layer, with lot of extension points, and manage above service VMs, also provide essential services(VM related, such as volume/network/VM etc.) to other services.
In your case, IMHO, what you really need is a separate or customized way to create SSVM, CPVM in CloudStack, either these VMs can be running on bare mental hardware, or behind a Load Balancer.
How do you think?
>
> > I think I see your point, however would that not pose a large
> > increase in logistics for huge multi-zone deployments?
> >
> > What if it were an optional feature. One could choose to abstract
> > the system VMs from the cloud, but was not forced to?
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Jul 18, 2012, at 10:31 AM, dan@soleks.com wrote:
> >
> >> Yep, like management servers running on the stand-alone hosts, or
> >> they are VMs on the separate infrastructure.
> >>
> >> > By "Will it be good idea to move that VMs out of CloudStack" do
> you
> >> > mean onto separate infrastructure? As in a non-managed
> >> > hypervisor,
> or
> >> > bare-metal?
> >> >
> >> > Sent from my iPhone
> >> >
> >> > On Jul 18, 2012, at 10:20 AM, dan@soleks.com wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi all,
> >> >>
> >> >> System VMs - SSVM and CPVM- both are critical components for
> >> >> CloudStack infrastructure, and as everybody probably noticed
> there
> >> >> are a lot of questions related to that VMs. Will it be good idea
> to
> >> >> move that VMs out of CloudStack, so they will be fully
> >> >> segregated from the cloud controlled by CS and from user's VMs.
> >> >> Eventually Cloudstack System will be - System Environment -
> >> >> Management
> Hosts
> >> >> (or VMs), SS Hosts (or VMs) and CP Hosts (or VMs) and Users
> >> >> Environment - Computational Hosts, VMs and Storage. Any thoughts
> >> >> about it ?
> >> >>
> >> >> Dan/borei.
> >> >>
> >> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> >> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> >
> >
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
RE: system VM out of CloudStack
Posted by Sheng Liang <Sh...@citrix.com>.
> That could be ultimate goal, and it's totally reflects "unix way" - don't use one huge universal tool, rather - set of small,
> but dedicated to particular task tools. As for now i see that CS is big monolithic complex, with tons internal, non-exposed dependencies.
I agree. Making the complex logic currently residing in system VM loosely coupled from CloudStack will greatly enhance modularity.
If we make that happen, CloudStack will consists of a core orchestration module and various loosely-coupled services running on top. Examples of these services are:
1. Console proxy
2. Template and ISO distribution (e.g., caching)
3. Snapshot backup (i.e., copying snapshots from primary storage to object store)
4. API proxy (e.g., EC2, S3, etc.)
5. Load balancers and firewalls
Once these services are nicely encapsulated, they can be deployed in different ways:
1. It makes sense to deploy certain services on dedicated physical servers. For example, Snapshot backup service needs direct access to storage network and massive network throughput. It runs the best on dedicated physical servers.
2. A lightweight developer setup can have all these services deployed on a single laptop or in a single application server. This simplifies debugging and troubleshooting.
3. CloudStack should continue to offer a system VM framework. Some or all of these services can be deployed into system VMs (just like today.) This approach has certain benefits as well because CloudStack can automatically manage the lifecycle of system VM, automatically monitor the system VM, and automatically scale the number of system VMs to respond to the load.
Sheng
Re: system VM out of CloudStack
Posted by Daniel Mezentsev <da...@soleks.com>.
Hi Edison,
missed your email. That could be ultimate goal, and it's totally
reflects "unix way" - don't use one huge universal tool, rather - set of
small, but dedicated to particular task tools. As for now i see that CS
is big monolithic complex, with tons internal, non-exposed dependencies.
If you can make system more transparent with potential option of choice
- your product will be pushed automatically to next level.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: dan@soleks.com [mailto:dan@soleks.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 10:56 AM
>> To: Kelceydamage@bbits
>> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: system VM out of CloudStack
>>
>> Agree, as any changes it will create some level of complexity - but
>> question is - is that solution better then existing one ? Even for
>> multi-zone deployment it's easier to keep separate pool of VMs of the
>> same type, then to have deep hierarchy inside zone. In additional That
>> system VMs (especially CPVM) can be behind loadbalancer, so it will be
>> really beneficial for environment with big number of console sessions,
>> and it can be scaled pretty easy.
> Actually, we have internally talked about to move system VMs(secondary storage vm, console proxy vm, router vm, even the API server) to a separate service layer.
> CloudStack core will be an Orchestration layer, with lot of extension points, and manage above service VMs, also provide essential services(VM related, such as volume/network/VM etc.) to other services.
> In your case, IMHO, what you really need is a separate or customized way to create SSVM, CPVM in CloudStack, either these VMs can be running on bare mental hardware, or behind a Load Balancer.
> How do you think?
>
>>> I think I see your point, however would that not pose a large
>>> increase in logistics for huge multi-zone deployments?
>>>
>>> What if it were an optional feature. One could choose to abstract the
>>> system VMs from the cloud, but was not forced to?
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Jul 18, 2012, at 10:31 AM, dan@soleks.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yep, like management servers running on the stand-alone hosts, or
>>>> they are VMs on the separate infrastructure.
>>>>
>>>>> By "Will it be good idea to move that VMs out of CloudStack" do
>> you
>>>>> mean onto separate infrastructure? As in a non-managed hypervisor,
>> or
>>>>> bare-metal?
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jul 18, 2012, at 10:20 AM, dan@soleks.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> System VMs - SSVM and CPVM- both are critical components for
>>>>>> CloudStack infrastructure, and as everybody probably noticed
>> there
>>>>>> are a lot of questions related to that VMs. Will it be good idea
>> to
>>>>>> move that VMs out of CloudStack, so they will be fully segregated
>>>>>> from the cloud controlled by CS and from user's VMs. Eventually
>>>>>> Cloudstack System will be - System Environment - Management
>> Hosts
>>>>>> (or VMs), SS Hosts (or VMs) and CP Hosts (or VMs) and Users
>>>>>> Environment - Computational Hosts, VMs and Storage. Any thoughts
>>>>>> about it ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dan/borei.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>>>>
>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
RE: system VM out of CloudStack
Posted by Edison Su <Ed...@citrix.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dan@soleks.com [mailto:dan@soleks.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2012 10:56 AM
> To: Kelceydamage@bbits
> Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: system VM out of CloudStack
>
> Agree, as any changes it will create some level of complexity - but
> question is - is that solution better then existing one ? Even for
> multi-zone deployment it's easier to keep separate pool of VMs of the
> same type, then to have deep hierarchy inside zone. In additional That
> system VMs (especially CPVM) can be behind loadbalancer, so it will be
> really beneficial for environment with big number of console sessions,
> and it can be scaled pretty easy.
Actually, we have internally talked about to move system VMs(secondary storage vm, console proxy vm, router vm, even the API server) to a separate service layer.
CloudStack core will be an Orchestration layer, with lot of extension points, and manage above service VMs, also provide essential services(VM related, such as volume/network/VM etc.) to other services.
In your case, IMHO, what you really need is a separate or customized way to create SSVM, CPVM in CloudStack, either these VMs can be running on bare mental hardware, or behind a Load Balancer.
How do you think?
>
> > I think I see your point, however would that not pose a large
> > increase in logistics for huge multi-zone deployments?
> >
> > What if it were an optional feature. One could choose to abstract the
> > system VMs from the cloud, but was not forced to?
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Jul 18, 2012, at 10:31 AM, dan@soleks.com wrote:
> >
> >> Yep, like management servers running on the stand-alone hosts, or
> >> they are VMs on the separate infrastructure.
> >>
> >> > By "Will it be good idea to move that VMs out of CloudStack" do
> you
> >> > mean onto separate infrastructure? As in a non-managed hypervisor,
> or
> >> > bare-metal?
> >> >
> >> > Sent from my iPhone
> >> >
> >> > On Jul 18, 2012, at 10:20 AM, dan@soleks.com wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hi all,
> >> >>
> >> >> System VMs - SSVM and CPVM- both are critical components for
> >> >> CloudStack infrastructure, and as everybody probably noticed
> there
> >> >> are a lot of questions related to that VMs. Will it be good idea
> to
> >> >> move that VMs out of CloudStack, so they will be fully segregated
> >> >> from the cloud controlled by CS and from user's VMs. Eventually
> >> >> Cloudstack System will be - System Environment - Management
> Hosts
> >> >> (or VMs), SS Hosts (or VMs) and CP Hosts (or VMs) and Users
> >> >> Environment - Computational Hosts, VMs and Storage. Any thoughts
> >> >> about it ?
> >> >>
> >> >> Dan/borei.
> >> >>
> >> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> >> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> >
> >
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
Re: system VM out of CloudStack
Posted by da...@soleks.com.
Agree, as any changes it will create some level of complexity - but question is - is that solution better then existing one ? Even for multi-zone deployment it's easier to keep separate pool of VMs of the same type, then to have deep hierarchy inside zone. In additional That system VMs (especially CPVM) can be behind loadbalancer, so it will be really beneficial for environment with big number of console sessions, and it can be scaled pretty easy.
> I think I see your point, however would that not pose a large
> increase in logistics for huge multi-zone deployments?
>
> What if it were an optional feature. One could choose to abstract the
> system VMs from the cloud, but was not forced to?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 18, 2012, at 10:31 AM, dan@soleks.com wrote:
>
>> Yep, like management servers running on the stand-alone hosts, or
>> they are VMs on the separate infrastructure.
>>
>> > By "Will it be good idea to move that VMs out of CloudStack" do you
>> > mean onto separate infrastructure? As in a non-managed hypervisor, or
>> > bare-metal?
>> >
>> > Sent from my iPhone
>> >
>> > On Jul 18, 2012, at 10:20 AM, dan@soleks.com wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> System VMs - SSVM and CPVM- both are critical components for
>> >> CloudStack infrastructure, and as everybody probably noticed there
>> >> are a lot of questions related to that VMs. Will it be good idea to
>> >> move that VMs out of CloudStack, so they will be fully segregated
>> >> from the cloud controlled by CS and from user's VMs. Eventually
>> >> Cloudstack System will be - System Environment - Management Hosts
>> >> (or VMs), SS Hosts (or VMs) and CP Hosts (or VMs) and Users
>> >> Environment - Computational Hosts, VMs and Storage. Any thoughts
>> >> about it ?
>> >>
>> >> Dan/borei.
>> >>
>> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> >> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>> >
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>
>
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
Re: system VM out of CloudStack
Posted by "Kelceydamage@bbits" <ke...@bbits.ca>.
I think I see your point, however would that not pose a large increase in logistics for huge multi-zone deployments?
What if it were an optional feature. One could choose to abstract the system VMs from the cloud, but was not forced to?
Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 18, 2012, at 10:31 AM, dan@soleks.com wrote:
> Yep, like management servers running on the stand-alone hosts, or they are VMs on the separate infrastructure.
>
> > By "Will it be good idea to move that VMs out of CloudStack" do you
> > mean onto separate infrastructure? As in a non-managed hypervisor, or
> > bare-metal?
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Jul 18, 2012, at 10:20 AM, dan@soleks.com wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> System VMs - SSVM and CPVM- both are critical components for
> >> CloudStack infrastructure, and as everybody probably noticed there
> >> are a lot of questions related to that VMs. Will it be good idea to
> >> move that VMs out of CloudStack, so they will be fully segregated
> >> from the cloud controlled by CS and from user's VMs. Eventually
> >> Cloudstack System will be - System Environment - Management Hosts
> >> (or VMs), SS Hosts (or VMs) and CP Hosts (or VMs) and Users
> >> Environment - Computational Hosts, VMs and Storage. Any thoughts
> >> about it ?
> >>
> >> Dan/borei.
> >>
> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> >> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> >
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
Re: system VM out of CloudStack
Posted by da...@soleks.com.
Yep, like management servers running on the stand-alone hosts, or they are VMs on the separate infrastructure.
> By "Will it be good idea to move that VMs out of CloudStack" do you
> mean onto separate infrastructure? As in a non-managed hypervisor, or
> bare-metal?
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 18, 2012, at 10:20 AM, dan@soleks.com wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> System VMs - SSVM and CPVM- both are critical components for
>> CloudStack infrastructure, and as everybody probably noticed there
>> are a lot of questions related to that VMs. Will it be good idea to
>> move that VMs out of CloudStack, so they will be fully segregated
>> from the cloud controlled by CS and from user's VMs. Eventually
>> Cloudstack System will be - System Environment - Management Hosts
>> (or VMs), SS Hosts (or VMs) and CP Hosts (or VMs) and Users
>> Environment - Computational Hosts, VMs and Storage. Any thoughts
>> about it ?
>>
>> Dan/borei.
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.