[one-dev] OpenNebula LXC Addon

[Valentin Bud]

Hey there Javi,

On Thu, Nov 07, 2013 at 11:40:23PM +0100, Javier Fontan wrote:
> This looks awesome!
>
> Do you want me to create a repository so we all can put our hands on it?

That would be great. It will take me some time to refactor the code and
add checks all over the place.

>
> I am sure asking a lot but would be great to have a little doc on how
> to setup a dev environment to test this. I know nothing about LXC. It
> doesn't need to be too detailed, we can do that afterwards.

I didn't think otherwise. The docs will be pretty thin at first but they
will evolve along side with the addon.

Cheers,
Valentin

>
> Thanks!
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:08 PM, Valentin Bud <valentin at databus.pro> wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >
> > I have a working PoC for an LXC addon and quite a few questions on
> > how to proceed further.
> >
> > In the actual state the driver has the following limitations:
> >
> >   * It only works with the LVM datastore,
> >
> >   * Couldn't find a way to transform user/system CPU time in percentage
> >     so the poll action returns 1 (hardcoded) for USEDCPU.
> >
> > For now the VMM driver responds to the following actions:
> >
> >   * deploy
> >   * shutdown
> >   * cancel
> >   * reset
> >   * reboot
> >   * poll
> >
> > I have used the lxc tools to manipulate containers and some
> > functionalities are not yet available. For example the reboot and reset
> > actions basically do stop/start. And the shutdown one doesn't do a clean
> > shutdown.
> >
> > I have developed the drivers to work on Debian Wheezy. Among the lxc
> > tools there is lxc-attach, which runs a command inside the container.
> >
> > Unfortunately the stable kernel doesn't support that but the
> > experimental one does. See Debian bug #595920 [1].
> >
> > Using lxc-attach, the shutdown operation could be executed cleanly. I am
> > about to test the experimental kernel, 3.8, in the near future. I am
> > also thinking of using lxc-attach for contextualization.
> >
> > I have quite a few questions about how to continue and some notes
> > about the template passed to the vmm driver.
> >
> > If your offer, Jaime, of doing a Hangout is still available I would like
> > to discuss them over there. After that we could write a report back to
> > the mailing list for people who couldn't attend. What do you think about
> > this?
> >
> > The next step I am going to do is to implement the same functionalities
> > using libvirt.
> >
> >> Anyway, I am certainly in favor of docker as a private PaaS on top of OpenNebula...
> >
> > Carlo, I am trying to understand how these two would fit together.
> > OpenNebula would deal with setting up storage, network and CPU/RAM
> > resources for dockers? I would really appreciate it if you could be a
> > little bit more specific.
> >
> > [1]: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=595920
> >
> > Cheers and Goodwill,
> > Valentin
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dev mailing list
> > Dev at lists.opennebula.org
> > http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/dev-opennebula.org
>
>
>
> --
> Javier Fontán Muiños
> Developer
> OpenNebula - The Open Source Toolkit for Data Center Virtualization
> www.OpenNebula.org | @OpenNebula | github.com/jfontan