A common starting point for a Compute oriented OpenStack cloud that can be expanded over time to include more of the OpenStack universe.
Application to current deliverables¶
The OpenStack Mission Statement: “To produce the ubiquitous Open Source Cloud Computing platform that will meet the needs of public and private clouds regardless of size, by being simple to implement and massively scalable.”
When new deployers first approach OpenStack as a project, they are presented with a vast and wonderful array of choices of components they could choose to begin with. So vast and wonderful that it becomes really hard for people to understand where to start; be confident that decisions they make will prevent them from deploying something usable; and ensure they are able to expand the scope of their OpenStack over time.
This paralysis of choice leads to substantial confusion and frustration, and drives a lot of would-be-adopters away for other stacks where there is a more clear starting point.
Because there has been such a robust discussion around this proposed tag, this tag definition attempts to clarify major questions and rationale that we’ve seen up to this point.
Why a Compute Starter Kit?¶
There are many ways one can use OpenStack, but based on the most recent User Survey, 98% of Production and Dev / Test clouds are using Nova , the highest of all OpenStack components. Even with a margin of error, we can assume that a Compute cloud is a key feature that’s wanted by nearly everyone that enters our community.
Why a Compute Starter Kit?¶
The intent is to define a small subset of projects that allow the deployer to experiment with both stateful and stateless uses of OpenStack. The target audience is someone new to cloud computing that is kicking the tires on a small number of servers in a basement or back room. It’s an attempt to frame OpenStack in a way that it will come in through the back door of an organization by curious and adventurous Ops folks (like Linux did in the early days), not just through the front door via a sales channel.
Starter Kit implies this is not the end point, but just a beginning.
Why is this needed?¶
The ‘big tent’ project structure reform of 2014 has been great for expanding the scope and features that are part of OpenStack. However that has scared and confused many members of our community who used the integrated release as their starting point, and see that now going away. Smaller Operators, Trainers, Hobbyists all have been asking the question, “where do I start?”.
The TC can either frame the question and provide the answer, or we can abdicate on this issue and leave it to others. I think we do a disservice to our community to punt on this issue.
Isn’t this just Defcore?¶
The starter kit doesn’t intend to be Defcore. It’s not expected that a starter kit compute cloud has enough features to actually be Defcore compliant. This is about a base minimal set of features to get people familiar with the OpenStack universe. It’s the hope that compute starter kits could grow up into actual Defcore compatible clouds before they move into production.
How would one expand on the Starter Kit?¶
The vision for the starter kit is it’s a starting place, with function that nearly all clouds will eventually want to have, and then documented ways to expand the cloud into additional functions. Where at all possible, expanding the Starter Kit should be a non-disruptive add rather than a replacement of one option for another.
For instance, a Compute Starter Kit which starts with a file based Glance is completely suitable for a small number of base images. However as the needs of such a cloud grow, there becomes a point at which this is no longer true, and adding a Swift installation to handle image storage is a much better option. The user could then migrate their content from file based to Swift. This also exposes them to a new set of things they can do with an Object API in their OpenStack environment.
The same kind of natural expansion could be done with projects such as Heat, Trove, Sahara and others when higher level functionality is desired out of their OpenStack cloud.
For some things where there are natural choices, such as Nova Network or Neutron, it’s important to keep the ability to naturally expand the cloud over time in mind. While Nova Network is simpler to set up and run, the transition to a Neutron-based cloud is not the same as swapping out a Glance storage backend. It is for that reason that the starter-kit recommends starting with Neutron configured for Provider Networks with Linux Bridge as a simple enough configuration which still has the possibility to add more complex SDN backends at a later date.
Doesn’t this conflate multiple compute use cases?¶
The moment you start a conversation about cloud “use cases” you assume a reasonably mature understanding of cloud and all its possible use cases (aka: stateful mail servers, stateless build servers, elastic webservers to handle holiday load). People that already have “use cases” likely do not need a starter kit.
The starter kit concept is for people that are early in their cloud journey. These are people that do not yet have use cases, and probably won’t until they experiment some with a starter kit.
For those people starting their journey into cloud computing, it provides an easy way to get used to API driven ephemeral computes. This allows them to see how existing workloads would fit in OpenStack, as well as the possibilities for building new OpenStack / cloud native workloads. Although support for persistent volumes is not included, the persistence of ephemeral drives is actually already as good as the persistence of local-disk workloads, and it is a non-disruptive addition to include persistent volumes in the future should the user decide they want them.
Does this mean all users have to start here?¶
Absolutely not. OpenStack is a wide and vast ecosystem of really interesting projects. Anyone who feels they don’t need this guidance is welcome to ignore it and build the right purpose built cloud for them. This is meant as a bridge to those users who don’t feel confident doing that to bring them into the OpenStack universe.
All projects must actively maintain stable branches
Rationale: these users will typically deploy stable releases only, and upgrade on stable point releases before jumping to the next stable release.
All projects must only use relational database and queue system
Rationale: providing HA stories for a relational database and amqp is substantial operational burden. Additional storage / messaging technologies provide too high an operational burden to meet for initial setup.
All projects must use oslo.config, oslo.log
Rationale: both of these are operator in / out surfaces. All projects in here should have the same mechanisms for input / output from an operational standpoint.
All projects must support upgrade without config file change
Rationale: the expected upgrade model is code upgrade on existing config files, cleaning up deprecation issues before upgrading to the next.
All projects must be a required to put a persistent VM on the network.
Rationale: we’d like to create a small enough starting point that getting everything up and running is a manageable project. We’d like to support persistent VMs because it’s something most operators are going to immediately have a use for, and can thus try it out for real in their environment.
The projects in this tag should make it easy to add new OpenStack projects into such a deployment over time.
Rationale: we’d like this to be a solid bit of ‘seed corn’ from which a larger and richer OpenStack deployment can be built out over time. Starting small with the ability to grow helps OpenStack adoption.
Tag application process¶
There is no need to apply for addition or removal.
No deprecation assumed, though there is the assumption that this concept will be revisited at every major release boundary for suitability.