-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 115
[Openstack cloud provider] Improvements on the floating ip logic #455
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We shouldn't be grabbing the loop here like this. Why are we changing from the standard
call_asyncmechanism that Dask uses internally?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, you are right. Let me give you a recap on why I implemented this in the first place;
I wanted to use OpenStackScheduler/OpenStackWorker on their own (without spinning up a full OpenStackCluster), but I realized that if I use
cluster.call_asyncwithout a cluster, Python quite naturally complains about “different event loop.” 😄I completely understand that this workaround (grabbing the loop and running it directly in an executor) is a bit of a hack—please let me know if you’d prefer a different approach.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We don't really support using
ProcessInterfacesubclasses outside of aCluster. What is your use case for doing this?Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have a use case where I have to provision a Dask cluster on two different OpenStack infrastructures (and they will communicate over the floating IPs). The trick here is that I only want to provision one scheduler on one of these clouds, and the workers should enroll themselves to it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see. Instead of changing this logic for everyone I've opened #456 which means that you could subclass
OpenStackInstancein your code and just overridecall_asyncwith your own logic here. That way you have the flexibility to do what you need, but without changing this functionality for all users.