Copyright (c) 2017 Red Hat, Inc.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0
Unported License.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode

Nodepool Drivers¶

Storyboard: https://storyboard.openstack.org/#!/story/2001044

Support multiple provider drivers in Nodepool, including static hosts.

Problem Description¶

As part of the Zuul v3 effort, it was envisioned that Nodepool would be expanded to support supplying static nodes in addition to the current support for OpenStack instances, as well as potentially nodes from other sources. The work to move the data structures and queue processing to ZooKeeper was expected to facilitate this. This specification relates both efforts, envisioning supplying static nodes as an implementation of the first alternative driver for Nodepool.

Proposed Change¶

There are many internal classes which will need to be changed to accomodate the additional level of abstraction necessary to support multiple drivers. This specification is intentionally vague as to exactly which should change, but instead lays out a high-level overview of what should be shared and where drivers should diverge in order to help guide implementation.

Nodepool’s current internal architecture is well suited to an extension to support multiple provider drivers. Because the queue processing, communication, and data storage all occur via ZooKeeper, it’s possible to create a component which fulfills Nodepool requests that is completely external to the current Nodepool codebase. That may prove useful in the future in the case of more esoteric systems. However, it would be useful for a wide range of Nodepool users to have built in support for not only OpenStack, but other cloud systems as well as static nodes. The following describes a method of extending the internal processing structure of Nodepool to share as much code between multiple drivers as possible (to reduce the maintenance cost of multiple drivers as well as the operational cost for users). Operators may choose to run multiple providers in a single process for ease of deployment, or they can split providers across multiple processes or hosts as needed for scaling or locality needs.

The nodepool-launcher daemon is internally structured as a number of threads, each dedicated to a particular task. The main thread, implemented by the NodePool class starts a PoolWorker for each provider-pool entry in the config file. That PoolWorker is responsible for accepting and fulfilling requests, though the specifics of actually fulfilling those requests are handled by other classes such as NodeRequestHandler.

We should extend the concept of a provider in Nodepool to also include a driver. Every provider should have a driver and also a pools section, but the rest of the provider configuration (clouds, images, etc.) should be specific to a given driver. Nodepool should start an instance of the PoolWorker class for every provider-pool combination in every driver. However, the OpenStack-specific behavior currently encoded in the classes utilized by PoolWorker should be abstracted so that a PoolWorker can be given a different driver as an argument and use that driver to supply nodes.

When nodes are returned to nodepool (their locks having been released), the CleanupWorker currently deletes those nodes. It similarly should be extended to recognize the driver which supplied the node, and perform an appropriate action on return (in the case of a static driver, the appropriate action may be to do nothing other than reset the node state to ready).

The configuration syntax will need some minor changes:

providers:
  - name: openstack-public-cloud
    driver: openstack
    cloud: some-cloud-name
    diskimages:
      - name: fedora25
    pools:
      - name: main
        max-servers: 10
        labels:
          - name: fedora25-small
            min-ram: 1024
            diskimage: fedora25
  - name: static
    driver: static
    pools:
      - name: main
        nodes:
        - name: static01.example.com
          host-key: <SSH host key>
          labels: static
        - name: static02.example.com
          host-key: <SSH host key>
          labels: static

Alternatives¶

We could require that any further drivers be implemented as separate processes, however, due to the careful attention paid to the Zookeeper and Nodepool protocol interactions when implementing the current fulfillment algorithm, prudence suggests that we at least provide some level of shared implementation code to avoid rewriting the otherwise boilerplate node request algorithm handling. As long as we’re doing that, it is only a small stretch to also facilitate multiple drivers within a single Nodepool launcher process so that running Nodepool does not become unecessarily complicated for an operator who wants to use a cloud and a handful of static servers.

Implementation¶

Assignee(s)¶

smyers
tristanC

Gerrit Branch¶

Nodepool and Zuul are both branched for development related to this spec. The “master” branches will continue to receive patches related to maintaining the current versions, and the “feature/zuulv3” branches will receive patches related to this spec. The .gitreview files have been be updated to submit to the correct branches by default.

Work Items¶

Abstract Nodepool request handling code to support multiple drivers
Abstract Nodepool provider management code to support multiple drivers
Collect current request handling implementation in an OpenStack driver
Extend Nodepool configuration syntax to support multiple drivers
Implement a static driver for Nodepool

Repositories¶

N/A

Servers¶

N/A

DNS Entries¶

N/A

Documentation¶

The Nodepool documentation should be reorganized by driver.

Security¶

There is no access control to restrict under what conditions static nodes can be requested. It is unlikely that Nodepool is the right place for that kind of restriction, so Zuul may need to be updated to allow such specifications before it is safe to add sensitive static hosts to Nodepool. However, for the common case of supplying specific real hardware in a known test environment, no access control is required, so the feature is useful without it.

Testing¶

This should be unit tested in the way typical for Nodepool.

Dependencies¶

This is related to the ongoing Zuul v3 work and builds on the completed Zookeeper Workers work in Nodepool.

Nodepool Drivers