Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: OpenStack: Dev

Openstack and Google Compute Engine

 

 

OpenStack dev RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


semyazz at gmail

Jun 30, 2012, 12:59 PM

Post #1 of 11 (245 views)
Permalink
Openstack and Google Compute Engine

Hello,

I've heard about Google's cloud recently. What do you think about it? Will
it be compatible with openstack? Or will openstack be compatible with them?
Anyone knows something about their solution? it's purely their technology?
Or maybe they were inspired by openstack or something else.

What about scalability? Their test app is really impressive - 600.000
cores. Is it even achievable in openstack? How can I create environment
with so many cores, in openstack?

I'm waiting for my invitation to google compute, but maybe someone has
already tested it.

Cheers,


semyazz at gmail

Jul 2, 2012, 7:25 AM

Post #2 of 11 (224 views)
Permalink
Re: Openstack and Google Compute Engine [In reply to]

Noone tested or noone is interested in Google Compute Engine and Openstack?

On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Simon G. <semyazz [at] gmail> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I've heard about Google's cloud recently. What do you think about it? Will
> it be compatible with openstack? Or will openstack be compatible with them?
> Anyone knows something about their solution? it's purely their technology?
> Or maybe they were inspired by openstack or something else.
>
> What about scalability? Their test app is really impressive - 600.000
> cores. Is it even achievable in openstack? How can I create environment
> with so many cores, in openstack?
>
> I'm waiting for my invitation to google compute, but maybe someone has
> already tested it.
>
> Cheers,
>



--
*Semy*


matt.joyce at cloudscaling

Jul 2, 2012, 10:17 AM

Post #3 of 11 (228 views)
Permalink
Re: Openstack and Google Compute Engine [In reply to]

Semy,

Google app engine and google compute engine are two different things.
App engine has been around for quite some time. The compute engine that
they offer as an IaaS solution is based off internal google software that
has also been in use internally for a lengthy amount of time.

Honestly, most people expected google to enter into the IaaS market much
earlier than this.


Noone tested or noone is interested in Google Compute Engine and Openstack?
>

I believe most of us are simply interested in ensuring an API compatibility
layer will exist. But as per planning that is not currently within the
confines of the OpenStack project, but is rather left to the openstack
distribution vendors. I think that eventually a standard method for
abstracting the various IaaS API layers will arise.

Usability functions are also interesting. Certainly compute engine
provides a different approach to the user experience in IaaS from what has
been the de facto standard in amazon. That's interesting as well.

> I've heard about Google's cloud recently. What do you think about it? Will
>> it be compatible with openstack? Or will openstack be compatible with them?
>> Anyone knows something about their solution? it's purely their technology?
>> Or maybe they were inspired by openstack or something else.
>>
> It is purely their technology. It likely pre-dates openstack. Eventually
an API compatibility layer will exist. I am certain that several
organizations are likely working on this as we speak. As stated earlier
that is not something the OpenStack project has a hand in at the moment.

> What about scalability? Their test app is really impressive - 600.000
>> cores. Is it even achievable in openstack? How can I create environment
>> with so many cores, in openstack?
>>
> I don't believe anyone has ever approached that number of course in a
single deployment. I have no doubt that openstack could scale to those
numbers. However a 600,000 core environment is akin to a 50,000 physical
node deployment of 2 cpu 6 core units. That is a colossal sum of
hardware. Very few organizations have that many physical nodes, much less
dedicated to a single IaaS environment.

> I'm waiting for my invitation to google compute, but maybe someone has
>> already tested it.
>>
> There are several reviews online already as well as reference
documentation on the offering.

-Matt


--
> *Semy*
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to : openstack [at] lists
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>


jaypipes at gmail

Jul 2, 2012, 10:34 AM

Post #4 of 11 (222 views)
Permalink
Re: Openstack and Google Compute Engine [In reply to]

On 07/02/2012 10:25 AM, Simon G. wrote:
> Noone tested or noone is interested in Google Compute Engine and Openstack?

No, I think it's just that nobody has looked into it yet. Also, when you
say "their test app is 600,000 cores", I don't think you have any
providers of OpenStack that (yet) have anywhere near that level of cores
to provide to an application... Google has the ability to utilize its
existing hardware infrastructure of hundreds of thousands (millions?) of
servers.

Trying to compare OpenStack to Google's Compute Engine is silly IMHO.
You really should be comparing GCE with grid computing engines and HPC
solutions, not cloud computing operator software like OpenStack.

The two are very different.

Best,
-jay

> On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Simon G. <semyazz [at] gmail
> <mailto:semyazz [at] gmail>> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I've heard about Google's cloud recently. What do you think about
> it? Will it be compatible with openstack? Or will openstack be
> compatible with them? Anyone knows something about their solution?
> it's purely their technology? Or maybe they were inspired by
> openstack or something else.
>
> What about scalability? Their test app is really impressive -
> 600.000 cores. Is it even achievable in openstack? How can I create
> environment with so many cores, in openstack?
>
> I'm waiting for my invitation to google compute, but maybe someone
> has already tested it.
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
>
> --
> /Semy/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to : openstack [at] lists
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>


_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack [at] lists
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


harlowja at yahoo-inc

Jul 2, 2012, 10:49 AM

Post #5 of 11 (226 views)
Permalink
Re: Openstack and Google Compute Engine [In reply to]

I'd be interested in hearing any comparisons, but it seems like it just came out so it might take a while...

Knowing how google is very secretive about there internal 'architecture' it might be really hard to make any in-depth comparisons.

On 7/2/12 7:25 AM, "Simon G." <semyazz [at] gmail> wrote:

Noone tested or noone is interested in Google Compute Engine and Openstack?

On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 9:59 PM, Simon G. <semyazz [at] gmail> wrote:

Hello,

I've heard about Google's cloud recently. What do you think about it? Will it be compatible with openstack? Or will openstack be compatible with them? Anyone knows something about their solution? it's purely their technology? Or maybe they were inspired by openstack or something else.

What about scalability? Their test app is really impressive - 600.000 cores. Is it even achievable in openstack? How can I create environment with so many cores, in openstack?

I'm waiting for my invitation to google compute, but maybe someone has already tested it.

Cheers,


d.busby at saiweb

Jul 2, 2012, 12:52 PM

Post #6 of 11 (224 views)
Permalink
Re: Openstack and Google Compute Engine [In reply to]

I for one am waiting on my invite to be processed; then I will be looking
at things like aeolus to run hybird cloud setups (I'll be contributing code
to that effect);

That said remember google open compute (as far as I am aware) is not open
source i.e. you can not download the engine and run a private google open
compute cloud.

I am for example using openstack to run internal private clouds; with
multiple end hosting providers (hybird cloud); of which google will be one.

I think the thing to take away is google are a company with vast resources
and the ability to deploy datacentres on a whim (search for their shipping
container dc's); if you have that kind of budget then I cant see any reason
for a similar openstack sized deployment, also if you have that kind of
buget I'll take 2 dc's ... im not greedy ;-)
On Jun 30, 2012 9:05 PM, "Simon G." <semyazz [at] gmail> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I've heard about Google's cloud recently. What do you think about it? Will
> it be compatible with openstack? Or will openstack be compatible with them?
> Anyone knows something about their solution? it's purely their technology?
> Or maybe they were inspired by openstack or something else.
>
> What about scalability? Their test app is really impressive - 600.000
> cores. Is it even achievable in openstack? How can I create environment
> with so many cores, in openstack?
>
> I'm waiting for my invitation to google compute, but maybe someone has
> already tested it.
>
> Cheers,
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to : openstack [at] lists
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
>


Paul.McMillan at Nebula

Jul 2, 2012, 3:55 PM

Post #7 of 11 (239 views)
Permalink
Re: Openstack and Google Compute Engine [In reply to]

It's KVM on Redhat with a fairly custom guest kernel, including
optimized drivers for their network encapsulation. Auth is handled using
their existing OAuth2.0 infrastructure.

As Matt said, their offering is fairly different from EC2 (and
Openstack), competing more with compute-heavy providers, rather than
amazon-like application-host offerings.

Their beta is currently only available to customers that they expect
will run real jobs. Expect a phone call and a conversation about your
application and current compute use before your organization gets an invite.

One neat thing about their product is that they provide dedicated
spindles on ephemeral disks for instances with more than 2 cores.

Their user tooling looks very nice. There are probably features worth
borrowing there.

-Paul


_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack [at] lists
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


semyazz at gmail

Jul 3, 2012, 2:01 AM

Post #8 of 11 (230 views)
Permalink
Re: Openstack and Google Compute Engine [In reply to]

Firstly, I'm just curious about their technology. I'm unable to make any
representative benchmark and that's why I was asking you about it. I'm just
a student during master thesis, interested in cloud computing, Openstack
etc. so I can't afford for such huge deployment :).

Secondly, I don't think we shouldn't compare GCE to Openstack. I understand
that right now cloud (Openstack, Amazon, ...) is just easy in use, managed
and scalable datacenter. It allows users to create VMs, upload their
images, easily increase their (limited) demands, but don't you think that
HPC is the right direction? I've always thought that final cloud's goal is
to provide easy in use HPC infrastructure. Where users could do what they
can do right now in the clouds (Amazon, Openstack), but also could do what
they couldn't do in typical datacenter. They should run instance, run
compute-heavy software and if they need more resources, they just add them.
if cloud is unable to provide necessary resources, they should move their
app to bigger cloud and do what they need. Openstack should be prepared for
such large deployment. It should also be prepared for HPC use cases. Or if
it's not prepared yet, it should be Openstack's goal.

I know that clouds are fulfilling current needs for scalable datacenter,
but it should also fulfill future needs. Apps are faster and faster. More
often they do image processing, voice recognition, data mining and it
should be clouds' goal to provide an easy way to create such advanced apps,
not just simple web server which could be scaled up, by adding few VMs and
load balancer to redirect requests. Infrastructure should be prepared even
for such large deployment like that in google. It should also be optimized
and support heavy computations. In the future it should be as efficient as
grids (or almost as efficient), because ease of use has already been
achieved. If, right now, it's easy to deploy VM into the cloud, the next
step should be to optimize infrastructure to increase performance.

I've always thought about clouds in that way. Maybe I was wrong. Maybe
cloud should do only what it's doing right now and let to others
technologies handle HPC.

Cheers,

On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 12:55 AM, Paul McMillan <Paul.McMillan [at] nebula>wrote:

> It's KVM on Redhat with a fairly custom guest kernel, including optimized
> drivers for their network encapsulation. Auth is handled using their
> existing OAuth2.0 infrastructure.
>
> As Matt said, their offering is fairly different from EC2 (and Openstack),
> competing more with compute-heavy providers, rather than amazon-like
> application-host offerings.
>
> Their beta is currently only available to customers that they expect will
> run real jobs. Expect a phone call and a conversation about your
> application and current compute use before your organization gets an invite.
>
> One neat thing about their product is that they provide dedicated spindles
> on ephemeral disks for instances with more than 2 cores.
>
> Their user tooling looks very nice. There are probably features worth
> borrowing there.
>
> -Paul
>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~**openstack<https://launchpad.net/%7Eopenstack>
> Post to : openstack [at] lists
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~**openstack<https://launchpad.net/%7Eopenstack>
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/**ListHelp<https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp>
>


--
Simon**


matt.joyce at cloudscaling

Jul 3, 2012, 7:12 AM

Post #9 of 11 (214 views)
Permalink
Re: Openstack and Google Compute Engine [In reply to]

On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 2:01 AM, Simon G. <semyazz [at] gmail> wrote:

> Secondly, I don't think we shouldn't compare GCE to Openstack. I
> understand that right now cloud (Openstack, Amazon, ...) is just easy in
> use, managed and scalable datacenter. It allows users to create VMs, upload
> their images, easily increase their (limited) demands, but don't you think
> that HPC is the right direction? I've always thought that final cloud's
> goal is to provide easy in use HPC infrastructure. Where users could do
> what they can do right now in the clouds (Amazon, Openstack), but also
> could do what they couldn't do in typical datacenter. They should run
> instance, run compute-heavy software and if they need more resources, they
> just add them. if cloud is unable to provide necessary resources, they
> should move their app to bigger cloud and do what they need. Openstack
> should be prepared for such large deployment. It should also be prepared
> for HPC use cases. Or if it's not prepared yet, it should be Openstack's
> goal.
>

HPC in the cloud operates more like a grid computing solution. With things
like Amazon HPC or HPC under openstack the idea is to allocate entire
physical systems to a user on the fly. Traditionally to date that has been
done with m1.full style instances. In many ways bare metal provisioning is
a better option here than a hypervisor. And for many people who do work in
an HPC environment bare metal really is the only solution that makes
sense.

The reality is that HPC use cases lose a lot of the underlying benefits of
cloud infrastructure. So they really are something of an edge case at the
moment. I believe that bare metal provisioning from within openstack could
be a bit of a game changer in HPC, and that it could be useful in a wide
variety of areas. But, ultimately I believe the usage that HPC in no way
reflects general computing needs. And that really sums it up. Most folks
do not need or want HPC. Most folks with HPC needs don't want a hypervisor
slowing down their memory access.


> I know that clouds are fulfilling current needs for scalable datacenter,
> but it should also fulfill future needs. Apps are faster and faster. More
> often they do image processing, voice recognition, data mining and it
> should be clouds' goal to provide an easy way to create such advanced apps,
> not just simple web server which could be scaled up, by adding few VMs and
> load balancer to redirect requests. Infrastructure should be prepared even
> for such large deployment like that in google. It should also be optimized
> and support heavy computations. In the future it should be as efficient as
> grids (or almost as efficient), because ease of use has already been
> achieved. If, right now, it's easy to deploy VM into the cloud, the next
> step should be to optimize infrastructure to increase performance.
>

Apps are actually slower and slower. The hardware is faster. The
Applications themselves abstract more and more and thus slow down. As for
what you do on your instances, that's entirely your own thing herr user.
Some large data and some serious compute use cases simply don't lend
themselves to cloud today. Hypervisors are limiting in so far as they give
up some speed to provide the ability to share resources better. If you
have no desire to share resources then virt machines become something of an
impediment to you. So I don't see this as being accurate for some use
cases.

There are also other external limiting factors. People don't just turn on
a dime. Many of the scientific and industrial applications of computing
power are built around software stacks that have grown over time, and for a
long time. Those stacks can't be made to easily adopt the benefits of a
new technology. Sometimes the reason not to use cloud as a platform is
entirely related to your inability to modify an existing software suite
enough to make it worthwhile. I have seen this before at super computing
facilities.


> I've always thought about clouds in that way. Maybe I was wrong. Maybe
> cloud should do only what it's doing right now and let to others
> technologies handle HPC.
>

I think many, in the HPC environment, argue this is probably true. I don't
necessarily agree. GCE obviously proves a point. Sharing resources means
that you don't have to run your own super computer. You can simply rent
enough of a compute environment to solve your problem at will. And odds
are the environment will be pretty up to date. For many use cases cloud
environments are just dandy. And HPC offerings in IaaS providers are
getting better all the time. For low funded research, citizen science, and
a million other small fries out there there is certainly a value in
lowering the barrier to entry in this technology.

That being said, I think that private HPC will never go away if only
because of data retention rules and law. Much research deals with data
that must be either safeguarded or simply classified and placed in an
environment that meets that classification levels needs. In some cases
those limiting factors can make working with the amazons or googles or
rackspaces of the world an impossibility.

So on one hand, yes I think HPC in openstack is important. And will grow
still more so as time goes on. But, on the flip side I believe HPC user
requirements do not reflect the needs of general computing users. From a
technical backend perspective the likelihood is most businesses have no
necessary use of HPC. And bursting to a public offering probably makes a
lot more sense than on their own private pond of compute resources.

One future environment might see an openstack environment local to the org
that has users testing instances and prepping them then sending them out
for a few days at a time every few months to crunch some data set on an HPC
environment. In that case the openstack environment would become an HPC
instance proving ground / staging area.

But hey, maybe I am wrong. =D

-Matt


jwalters at isi

Jul 3, 2012, 8:51 AM

Post #10 of 11 (214 views)
Permalink
Re: Openstack and Google Compute Engine [In reply to]

Matt,

I agree with almost everything that you're saying, except to add that we hope to change things. I hope that our work at ISI is moving in that direction. But you're right, hypervisors add some overhead, network performance isn't always great, etc. Things are changing, albeit slowly, but I'm optimistic that we'll get there. Amazon's #70-something ranked supercomputer is evidence that the cloud can compete, at least as far as stunt computers (HPL) go. That the cloud enables you to customize your environment has proven to be a very powerful motivation for the folks that we work with.

That reminds me, we had intended to set up a monthly (or so) HPC telecon after the most recent design summit. I'd like to follow up with that. I'll send a separate email to get that going, for those that are interested.

best,
JP



On Jul 3, 2012, at 10:12 AM, Matt Joyce wrote:

>
> On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 2:01 AM, Simon G. <semyazz [at] gmail> wrote:
> Secondly, I don't think we shouldn't compare GCE to Openstack. I understand that right now cloud (Openstack, Amazon, ...) is just easy in use, managed and scalable datacenter. It allows users to create VMs, upload their images, easily increase their (limited) demands, but don't you think that HPC is the right direction? I've always thought that final cloud's goal is to provide easy in use HPC infrastructure. Where users could do what they can do right now in the clouds (Amazon, Openstack), but also could do what they couldn't do in typical datacenter. They should run instance, run compute-heavy software and if they need more resources, they just add them. if cloud is unable to provide necessary resources, they should move their app to bigger cloud and do what they need. Openstack should be prepared for such large deployment. It should also be prepared for HPC use cases. Or if it's not prepared yet, it should be Openstack's goal.
>
> HPC in the cloud operates more like a grid computing solution. With things like Amazon HPC or HPC under openstack the idea is to allocate entire physical systems to a user on the fly. Traditionally to date that has been done with m1.full style instances. In many ways bare metal provisioning is a better option here than a hypervisor. And for many people who do work in an HPC environment bare metal really is the only solution that makes sense.
>
> The reality is that HPC use cases lose a lot of the underlying benefits of cloud infrastructure. So they really are something of an edge case at the moment. I believe that bare metal provisioning from within openstack could be a bit of a game changer in HPC, and that it could be useful in a wide variety of areas. But, ultimately I believe the usage that HPC in no way reflects general computing needs. And that really sums it up. Most folks do not need or want HPC. Most folks with HPC needs don't want a hypervisor slowing down their memory access.
>
> I know that clouds are fulfilling current needs for scalable datacenter, but it should also fulfill future needs. Apps are faster and faster. More often they do image processing, voice recognition, data mining and it should be clouds' goal to provide an easy way to create such advanced apps, not just simple web server which could be scaled up, by adding few VMs and load balancer to redirect requests. Infrastructure should be prepared even for such large deployment like that in google. It should also be optimized and support heavy computations. In the future it should be as efficient as grids (or almost as efficient), because ease of use has already been achieved. If, right now, it's easy to deploy VM into the cloud, the next step should be to optimize infrastructure to increase performance.
>
> Apps are actually slower and slower. The hardware is faster. The Applications themselves abstract more and more and thus slow down. As for what you do on your instances, that's entirely your own thing herr user. Some large data and some serious compute use cases simply don't lend themselves to cloud today. Hypervisors are limiting in so far as they give up some speed to provide the ability to share resources better. If you have no desire to share resources then virt machines become something of an impediment to you. So I don't see this as being accurate for some use cases.
>
> There are also other external limiting factors. People don't just turn on a dime. Many of the scientific and industrial applications of computing power are built around software stacks that have grown over time, and for a long time. Those stacks can't be made to easily adopt the benefits of a new technology. Sometimes the reason not to use cloud as a platform is entirely related to your inability to modify an existing software suite enough to make it worthwhile. I have seen this before at super computing facilities.
>
> I've always thought about clouds in that way. Maybe I was wrong. Maybe cloud should do only what it's doing right now and let to others technologies handle HPC.
>
> I think many, in the HPC environment, argue this is probably true. I don't necessarily agree. GCE obviously proves a point. Sharing resources means that you don't have to run your own super computer. You can simply rent enough of a compute environment to solve your problem at will. And odds are the environment will be pretty up to date. For many use cases cloud environments are just dandy. And HPC offerings in IaaS providers are getting better all the time. For low funded research, citizen science, and a million other small fries out there there is certainly a value in lowering the barrier to entry in this technology.
>
> That being said, I think that private HPC will never go away if only because of data retention rules and law. Much research deals with data that must be either safeguarded or simply classified and placed in an environment that meets that classification levels needs. In some cases those limiting factors can make working with the amazons or googles or rackspaces of the world an impossibility.
>
> So on one hand, yes I think HPC in openstack is important. And will grow still more so as time goes on. But, on the flip side I believe HPC user requirements do not reflect the needs of general computing users. From a technical backend perspective the likelihood is most businesses have no necessary use of HPC. And bursting to a public offering probably makes a lot more sense than on their own private pond of compute resources.
>
> One future environment might see an openstack environment local to the org that has users testing instances and prepping them then sending them out for a few days at a time every few months to crunch some data set on an HPC environment. In that case the openstack environment would become an HPC instance proving ground / staging area.
>
> But hey, maybe I am wrong. =D
>
> -Matt
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> Post to : openstack [at] lists
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp


Tim.Bell at cern

Jul 3, 2012, 11:20 AM

Post #11 of 11 (215 views)
Permalink
Re: Openstack and Google Compute Engine [In reply to]

HPC is often used as a general term but it is actually many different facets depending on the computing model.

CERN is at the centre of a server grid of 100,000s of servers called WLCG (http://wlcg.web.cern.ch) for analyzing the data from the Large Hadron Collider. The servers are located at over 200 sites worldwide in a tiered structure.

However, we're more of High Throughput Computing (HTC) rather than HPC. HTC has a large number of programs running at the same time which have no need to talk to each other. Thus, it is more like a large scale batch farm than a massively parallel machine.

While we lose a little performance on memory and I/O performance, virtualization brings major benefits in ease of management of the thousands of servers. We expect to be saving the few percent of overhead over the lifetime of machines by more flexibility scheduling repairs and placing the workload, such as overcommitting a hypervisor when one of the VMs is waiting for a tape to be mounted.

Analysing the 25PB/year for the next 20 years, we're pretty intensive compute and I/O load. However, when we take the total cost of ownership, people included, we expect a significant efficiency gain from the use of a private cloud. Some more details at http://cern.ch/go/NH9w

The massively parallel processing use cases with Crays/BlueGenes may not benefit from private clouds but many of the research sites will.

Tim

On 3 Jul 2012, at 16:12, Matt Joyce wrote:


On Tue, Jul 3, 2012 at 2:01 AM, Simon G. <semyazz [at] gmail<mailto:semyazz [at] gmail>> wrote:
Secondly, I don't think we shouldn't compare GCE to Openstack. I understand that right now cloud (Openstack, Amazon, ...) is just easy in use, managed and scalable datacenter. It allows users to create VMs, upload their images, easily increase their (limited) demands, but don't you think that HPC is the right direction? I've always thought that final cloud's goal is to provide easy in use HPC infrastructure. Where users could do what they can do right now in the clouds (Amazon, Openstack), but also could do what they couldn't do in typical datacenter. They should run instance, run compute-heavy software and if they need more resources, they just add them. if cloud is unable to provide necessary resources, they should move their app to bigger cloud and do what they need. Openstack should be prepared for such large deployment. It should also be prepared for HPC use cases. Or if it's not prepared yet, it should be Openstack's goal.

HPC in the cloud operates more like a grid computing solution. With things like Amazon HPC or HPC under openstack the idea is to allocate entire physical systems to a user on the fly. Traditionally to date that has been done with m1.full style instances. In many ways bare metal provisioning is a better option here than a hypervisor. And for many people who do work in an HPC environment bare metal really is the only solution that makes sense.

The reality is that HPC use cases lose a lot of the underlying benefits of cloud infrastructure. So they really are something of an edge case at the moment. I believe that bare metal provisioning from within openstack could be a bit of a game changer in HPC, and that it could be useful in a wide variety of areas. But, ultimately I believe the usage that HPC in no way reflects general computing needs. And that really sums it up. Most folks do not need or want HPC. Most folks with HPC needs don't want a hypervisor slowing down their memory access.

I know that clouds are fulfilling current needs for scalable datacenter, but it should also fulfill future needs. Apps are faster and faster. More often they do image processing, voice recognition, data mining and it should be clouds' goal to provide an easy way to create such advanced apps, not just simple web server which could be scaled up, by adding few VMs and load balancer to redirect requests. Infrastructure should be prepared even for such large deployment like that in google. It should also be optimized and support heavy computations. In the future it should be as efficient as grids (or almost as efficient), because ease of use has already been achieved. If, right now, it's easy to deploy VM into the cloud, the next step should be to optimize infrastructure to increase performance.

Apps are actually slower and slower. The hardware is faster. The Applications themselves abstract more and more and thus slow down. As for what you do on your instances, that's entirely your own thing herr user. Some large data and some serious compute use cases simply don't lend themselves to cloud today. Hypervisors are limiting in so far as they give up some speed to provide the ability to share resources better. If you have no desire to share resources then virt machines become something of an impediment to you. So I don't see this as being accurate for some use cases.

There are also other external limiting factors. People don't just turn on a dime. Many of the scientific and industrial applications of computing power are built around software stacks that have grown over time, and for a long time. Those stacks can't be made to easily adopt the benefits of a new technology. Sometimes the reason not to use cloud as a platform is entirely related to your inability to modify an existing software suite enough to make it worthwhile. I have seen this before at super computing facilities.

I've always thought about clouds in that way. Maybe I was wrong. Maybe cloud should do only wh)at it's doing right now and let to others technologies handle HPC.

I think many, in the HPC environment, argue this is probably true. I don't necessarily agree. GCE obviously proves a point. Sharing resources means that you don't have to run your own super computer. You can simply rent enough of a compute environment to solve your problem at will. And odds are the environment will be pretty up to date. For many use cases cloud environments are just dandy. And HPC offerings in IaaS providers are getting better all the time. For low funded research, citizen science, and a million other small fries out there there is certainly a value in lowering the barrier to entry in this technology.

That being said, I think that private HPC will never go away if only because of data retention rules and law. Much research deals with data that must be either safeguarded or simply classified and placed in an environment that meets that classification levels needs. In some cases those limiting factors can make working with the amazons or googles or rackspaces of the world an impossibility.

So on one hand, yes I think HPC in openstack is important. And will grow still more so as time goes on. But, on the flip side I believe HPC user requirements do not reflect the needs of general computing users. From a technical backend perspective the likelihood is most businesses have no necessary use of HPC. And bursting to a public offering probably makes a lot more sense than on their own private pond of compute resources.

One future environment might see an openstack environment local to the org that has users testing instances and prepping them then sending them out for a few days at a time every few months to crunch some data set on an HPC environment. In that case the openstack environment would become an HPC instance proving ground / staging area.

But hey, maybe I am wrong. =D

-Matt

_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
Post to : openstack [at] lists<mailto:openstack [at] lists>
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp

OpenStack dev RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.