Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Is OpenStack the New Linux?

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the interesting-tools-find-interesting-uses dept.

Cloud 185

snydeq writes "As the self-proclaimed 'cloud OS for the datacenter,' OpenStack is fast becoming one of the more intriguing movements in open source — complete with lofty ambitions, community in-fighting, and commercial appeal. But questions remain whether this project can reach its potential of becoming the new Linux. 'The allure of OpenStack is clear: Like Linux, OpenStack aims to provide a kernel around which all kinds of software vendors can build businesses. But with OpenStack, we're talking multiple projects to provide agile cloud management of compute, storage, and networking resources across the data center — plus authentication, self-service, resource monitoring, and a slew of other projects. It's hugely ambitious, perhaps the most far-reaching open source project ever, although still at a very early stage. ... Clearly, the sky-high aspirations of OpenStack both fuel its outrageous momentum and incur the risk of overreach and collapse, as it incites all manner of competition. The promise is big, but the success of OpenStack is by no means assured.'"

cancel ×

185 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Done. (5, Funny)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 2 years ago | (#40247931)

...projects to provide agile cloud management...

Whenever I see "blaw...blaw AGILE blaw...blaw", I stop reading.

Re:Done. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248015)

Needed webscale and enterprise value there. Agile alone isn't agile enough.

Re:Done. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248123)

But don't you see?? This is it! This is the year of OpenStack!

-A.C.

Re:Done. (1)

gd2shoe (747932) | more than 2 years ago | (#40249973)

I hear you. The summary reads like an advert.

Re:Done. (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248055)

Whenever I see a question mark in the headline I stop reading.

Re:Done. (5, Interesting)

simcop2387 (703011) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248339)

I always think of Betteridge's Law of Headlines

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge's_Law_of_Headlines [wikipedia.org]

Betteridge's Law of Headlines? (1)

Jon_E (148226) | more than 2 years ago | (#40249481)

I stopped reading this thread when I saw "blaw .. blaw AGI

Re:Done. (1)

Bobtree (105901) | more than 2 years ago | (#40249513)

Is Betteridge's Law of Headlines the new Sturgeon's Law?

We fed this into a 1960s computer and it exploded (1, Flamebait)

Dogtanian (588974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40250631)

I always think of Betteridge's Law of Headlines

Headline I'd like to see: "Is Betteridge's Law of Headlines actually correct?"

Re:Done. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40249079)

But not typing? Damn. Well thanks, you have just imitated everything that annoys me in life. People talking on a subject with no idea what the subject at hand actually is.

Re:Done. (5, Funny)

Smauler (915644) | more than 2 years ago | (#40249095)

I reckon the slashdot editors should just have gone the whole hog, with :

"2013 : The Year of OpenStack on the Desktop?"

Re:Done. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248071)

But more importantly how will it syngerize my current infrastructure?

Re:Done. (1)

the_B0fh (208483) | more than 2 years ago | (#40249105)

It will start with spellcheck...

Whenever I see (1)

bazald (886779) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248083)

Whenever I see "Whenever I see",

Re:Done. (4, Insightful)

NickFortune (613926) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248111)

I got that with "cloud".

How open can the system be when it runs on someone else's hardware under someone else's control?

OK, maybe potentially big news for cloud service vendors, but I can't the average Linux hobby coder giving this a lot of time or effort

Re:Done. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248235)

Well, if you want to host your own Cloud, it is very open. Though, it's aimed at those who want to offer Cloud services to others, so maybe it's not so open for the client. Instead of building their own from scratch, companies can use open stack. It helps the company offering cloud services because it's OS and has a community for support. It creates more competitive business because a client can take their cloud data to another OpenStack company if they aren't satisfied with the service. And it helps Rackspace's get way more development resources for their money and hopefully make a better product. Since it's open, RS is competing on service, which of course is their strong suit.

Re:Done. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248361)

It's open as in open source. Not open as in your mom's pussy.

Re:Done. (5, Interesting)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248765)

I dunno...

We're already hearing about "local clouds" - essentially building a small-scale cloud for your own large company. So, say, Hewlett-Packard could, instead of renting cloud space, could build a small "cloud" just for themselves.

Once that becomes relatively common, someone will come up with the "personal cloud" - a small home server, that "does" "everything" "the cloud" "does". I actually expect IPv6 may help with this - if you can access "your" cloud from anywhere, what advantage does "the" cloud have?

And then, once that becomes common for nerds and the tech-savvy wealthy, someone will decide to do it in software instead of a dedicated hardware appliance. I expect they shall call it a "desktop cloud".

And then the loop begins AGAIN!

Re:Done. (1)

TubeSteak (669689) | more than 2 years ago | (#40249383)

We're already hearing about "local clouds" - essentially building a small-scale cloud for your own large company.

The difference between mainframes + thin clients and "local clouds" is.... the number of servers?

Re:Done. (4, Insightful)

aix tom (902140) | more than 2 years ago | (#40250053)

So at which number of "servers" does it become a cloud?

Up until about 2-3 years ago we had about 50 or so "Hardware" servers at our company. Which we replaced one after the other with two bladecenters with 24 blades in total, in two different buildings plus NAS clusters, running everything on virtual machines. Those are advertised by IBM as "IBM BladeCenter for Cloud", so at least THEY think that already is "the cloud".

I, personally, have come to think that once you run something in a virtual machine, clustered in a way that one hardware box going down has no effect of your "Application" running it is basically "The Cloud". Of course that has been around for decades "The Cloud" is only a new marketing speak that has come up.

Re:Done. (1)

yahwotqa (817672) | more than 2 years ago | (#40250215)

Personal cloud? Oh, you mean owncloud.org

Re:Done. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248889)

I got that with "cloud".

I also auto respond with a mental "ignore" button as soon as I see "cloud".
I haven't looked too deeply into what a "cloud" is supposed to be (descriptions I recall tend used a lot of soft-science speak), but my notion is that it is just the age-old LAMP bundle given a dose of marketing. At its core, it seems that the main gist of the effort behind "the cloud" is handing over your unique IT needs to a faceless group of people for some minor savings in the first couple of quarters under their control.
Yeah, that's gonna happen.

Re:Done. (3, Interesting)

MrBandersnatch (544818) | more than 2 years ago | (#40249305)

I thought the same but have been doing some digging of late. I've only really looked at depth into AWS so far, and yes, it can be as simple as sticking a LAMP stack in the "cloud". BUT if you need to scale that up, there's some rather neat stuff for load balancing and auto-scaling, basically being able to build a service/system that could handle the slashdot effect without needing the long term hardware commitments. And its rather easy to do. Add into it the ability to distribute your content across multiple cache servers to speed up access and you have the ability to put together global infrastructure at a fraction of the cost of a data centre deployment.

Now as to the long-term costs, I actually view that as much as a matter of good management of that infrastructure - demand not as expected then cut back on resources used or if there's constant demand then reserve (pay up front for) that capacity and cut costs. While it might not be right for every project cloud based services have enough advantages and make sufficient economic sense that it is fool-hardy to ignore them any longer.

Re:Done. (2)

ducomputergeek (595742) | more than 2 years ago | (#40250091)

At first I tried calling 'cloud computing' time-share 2.0. The name never caught on with the younger developers, but got some laughs from the guys who were a bit older than I am, and a raised eye-brow or two. (I'm in my mid 30's, but my parents worked around the computers in the glory days of room sized main frames).

Cloud computing can be useful. We're using a CDN to serve up the relatively static HTML/JS/CSS client and "cloud computing" for the web services layer to handle traffic spikes. On major event days (say when we're doing 4 - 5 events on a day) is when it gets hammered. It would cost quite a bit for dedicated equipment and expertise to handle those types of loads only to sit idle 95% of the time. Now the database cluster is all dedicated hardware which we've spent some money on. I've been involved in a couple horrible project that attempted to scale databases on "cloud computing" before things were frankly ready. I think enough hiccups are understood now that we'll likely explore it later this year.

Re:Done. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248313)

What if we proactively resynergize the cloud environment to more effectively leverage the inherent verticles of the paradigm?

If you wonder why it sounds like marketing... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248391)

FTFA:

It's a big change of scene for me. My last full-time job was in Windows Server product marketing, which prevented me from writing for InfoWorld or anyone else except my Redmond bosses for four years. Now I'm back in the game, laptop battery fully charged, ready to chronicle the next big thing in open source.

It sounds like marketing because it is marketing.

Re:Done. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248873)

Whenever I see "blaw...blaw CLOUD blaw...blaw", I stop reading.

Re:Done. (1)

Frnknstn (663642) | more than 2 years ago | (#40250199)

Re: your sig:

Dark Matter is the Phlogiston of Contemporary Cosmology

Does that mean that quantum field theory is the luminiferous aether of modern particle physics?

No (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40247935)

Stop being retarded.

linux is a kernel (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40247963)

not an OS, you slashtard

yup (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248027)

I've HURD this before.

Re:yup (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248189)

Somehow I just GNU there would be a smarmy AC cracking puns.

Meta-engineering (4, Insightful)

Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248031)

As a general rule, the only way to build something large and complex that works is to grow it from something small and simple that works.

Re:Meta-engineering (5, Insightful)

morcego (260031) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248113)

As a general rule, the only way to build something large and complex that works is to grow it from something small and simple that works.

As a general rule, something simple that works will grow into something large and complex that doesn't work, and no one can figure why.

Re:Meta-engineering (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248351)

Way too many developers practice rampant entropy. But, they talk a good game, get promoted to mgmt & big bucks & wear ties, then corporate only listens the them & get rid of anyone with brains for jumping up & down & screaming "I told you so!".

Re:Meta-engineering (1)

osu-neko (2604) | more than 2 years ago | (#40249479)

As a general rule, something simple that works will grow into something large and complex that doesn't work, and no one can figure why.

Feeping creaturism...

Re:Meta-engineering (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248681)

When you're in the little room
and you're working on something good
but if it's really good
you're might need a bigger room
when you're in the bigger room
you might know what to do
you might need to think of
how you got started
when you're sitting in your little room

Which is why... (2)

tlambert (566799) | more than 2 years ago | (#40249351)

As a general rule, the only way to build something large and complex that works is to grow it from something small and simple that works.

Which is why the Saturn V booster used in the Apollo 11 mission to the moon was built out of Legos.

-- Terry

Re:Which is why... (1)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | more than 2 years ago | (#40250701)

I'm pretty sure his qualifier "as a general rule" makes your post absurdly meaningless.

Wait, what? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248039)

OpenStack is a Linux distribution organized for deploying a compute cloud. Linux is the new Linux?

Re:Wait, what? (5, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248057)

In other words "We have a new distro, how can we get some free advertising..."

Re:Wait, what? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248359)

I'm not following. OpenStack isn't a Linux distro, Red Hat is contributing to it but they didn't start it or own it.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

Vairon (17314) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248373)

I don't think it's even a Linux distribution because the install guides for the different types of OpenStack nodes start with instructions for Ubuntu, Debian, CentOS, Fedora, RHEL.

http://wiki.openstack.org/InstallInstructions/Nova [openstack.org] (Compute node)
http://wiki.openstack.org/InstallInstructions/Swift [openstack.org] (Storage node)
http://wiki.openstack.org/InstallInstructions/Glance [openstack.org] (Image server)

Re:Wait, what? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248377)

OpenStack is a Linux distribution organized for deploying a compute cloud. Linux is the new Linux?

No it's not. It's a virtualization management platform with appropriate interfaces for clients that you can deploy on pretty much any Linux server.

Re:Wait, what? (5, Informative)

MattW (97290) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248481)

OpenStack isn't a distro. It's a collection of utilities for virtualizing and managing compute and storage resources to build clouds. Putting Apache, PHP, and MySQL onto a linux box doesn't make the LAMP stack "Linux" any more than putting OpenStack services (Nova, swift, etc) onto a Linux distro makes OpenStack Linux.

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40250067)

2005 called, they want their ParallelKnoppix back?

Re:Wait, what? (1)

Zero__Kelvin (151819) | more than 2 years ago | (#40250733)

Putting any other application stack on a Linux Box - LAMP based or not - doesn't make that application the new Linux, either.

Re:Wait, what? (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248503)

As i was reading this, i was thinking the same thing. Besides, you have to have a client to get there...

Re:Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248811)

Isn't OpenStack goal to implement the concepts published about Google's internal data-center software Google OS v1, which is also Linux based?

Re:Wait, what? (3, Informative)

sp1n (99710) | more than 2 years ago | (#40249345)

OpenStack is a virtualization and object storage infrastructure and management system. It is not an operating system or a Linux distribution. It's an application. Rackspace is a major sponsor of the project, and eats their own dog food. Nova is the VM side, and supports (to varying degrees) pretty much every hypervisor. Swift is the object store that Rackspace Cloud Files is based on.

This should not be compared to kernels, Linux or anything of the sort. "...a major threat to VMware, Citrix and Parallels datacenter management products" would be a lot better.

Noise without content (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248051)

It sounds very exciting until you look at the code. Then you realise that the quality in the project is entirely in the marketing, and there's nothing of worth code-wise at all.

More clound BS? Not again. (3, Insightful)

gweihir (88907) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248061)

And something that does everything, no less. In general, this means it does nothing well. Big egos are just the hallmark of failure. Lets see whether anybody even remembers this in 20 years. Personally, I doubt it.

Re:More clound BS? Not again. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248205)

Big egos are just the hallmark of failure.

lolwut?

Re:More clound BS? Not again. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248261)

It takes a big ego to start an operating system project. We wouldn't even have Linux if it wasn't for a guy who thought he could make a faster kernel than the stock minix kernel.

Re:More clound BS? Not again. (4, Funny)

metrometro (1092237) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248263)

Big egos are just the hallmark of failure.

-- Sent from my iPhone

FTFY

Re:More clound BS? Not again. (1)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248543)

Big egos are just the hallmark of failure.

Eh? I'm pretty sure most successful people have huge egos. Steve Jobs, Donald Trump, Hurd the turd... I could make a long and pointless list pretty easily. I think that big egos are generally the result of success.

Re:More clound BS? Not again. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248877)

There are also a lot of people in prison with huge egos too...

Re:More clound BS? Not again. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40250749)

There are also a lot of people in prison with huge egos too...

Since people with big egos have both succeeded and failed, then big egos may not be the hallmark of failure after all.

Re:More clound BS? Not again. (1)

gman003 (1693318) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248793)

A big enough failure guarantees your place in history.

You remember the Ford Pinto? The Hindenburg? The Titanic?

Do you at least remember the Alamo?

Failures, every one of them, but remembered!

Re:More clound BS? Not again. (1)

xded (1046894) | more than 2 years ago | (#40250531)

I wonder if people were saying the same thing 21 years ago when Linus Torvalds released his OS.

(I'm not implying that I think OpenStack will be successful, just that your point doesn't sound so strong to me.)

Question in the title (1)

SolitaryMan (538416) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248065)

Just applying the rule I saw somewhere: if the title is a question, the answer is "No".

Do you mind if I grab your wallet? (3, Funny)

mccrew (62494) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248105)

Just testing out that question in the title thing... :)

Re:Question in the title (1)

iozozturk (2005838) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248337)

Just applying the rule I saw somewhere: if the title is a question, the answer is "No".

this was just what came to my mind when i just read the title, w/o the knowledge of this rule. cheers

what problem does OpenStack address? (3, Insightful)

hxnwix (652290) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248091)

Is there some deficiency in Linux and the various BSDs that OpenStack is intended to remedy?

Re:what problem does OpenStack address? (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248149)

Is there some deficiency in Linux and the various BSDs that OpenStack is intended to remedy?

Yes: Not enough free advertising on Slashdot.

Re:what problem does OpenStack address? (4, Informative)

MindStalker (22827) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248171)

Its not intended to be a replacement for an OS. If you read the article its basic a set of software to allow you to roll you own cloud solution. Basically Amazon EC2 in a box. You'd still need to install OSs on the virtual machines.
No no its no the new Linux, the Title is misleading.

Re:what problem does OpenStack address? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40249197)

What is the "cloud", please?

I mean, is it just like the virtualised processing units on mainframes of the '60s?

I have been on the Internet for 17 years now and I haven't yet met a term used so much but meaning so close to nothing.

Re:what problem does OpenStack address? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40249699)

What is the "cloud", please?

I mean, is it just like the virtualised processing units on mainframes of the '60s?

I have been on the Internet for 17 years now and I haven't yet met a term used so much but meaning so close to nothing.

do you really think all this cloud stuff is bs...and that the large amount of sysadmins that are utilizing it are just plain dumb?

i work at a company that serves massive amounts of web requests in the retail sector. we have a ~30% greater need for computing resources for the period between mid-november and early january. why should we buy that hardware just to let it sit idle for most of the year? why not use resources from a "cloud" provider that allows us to scale horizontally very quickly as needed?

we also have a "private cloud", where our developers can spin up entire environments in minutes to do, well, whatever it is they need to do. zero sysadmin help required.

or say you work at a small startup that can't afford to purchase their own physical servers, or don't have a full time sysadmin to manager them. the cost to enter the cloud market is very attractive in such a situation (although AWS can be somewhat pricey), so they may choose to go that route.

just because there's no need for cloud computing at your company doesn't mean there's not a need elsewhere. cloud is often used as a buzz word, that's tru, but that doesn't mean that's ALL it's used as.

Re:what problem does OpenStack address? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40249809)

You are discussing the value of the cloud.

I am honestly asking for a clear definition of what "the cloud" is. I know why timesharing the mainframe is useful and I know why virtual servers are useful - as I said, we've had them since the '60s. What I am trying to understand is what "the cloud" is, if anything more than that.

Re:what problem does OpenStack address? (1)

XXeR (447912) | more than 2 years ago | (#40250079)

are you being intentionally obtuse? so you have a single physical server, and you throw xen on it. how can you enable a developer to easily launch several guests that make up a db/app stack on which he is developing? now extrapolate to 1000 servers. tools built to make this easy and to manage them as one unit can define a cloud computing environment. openstack is one such suite of tools, eucalyptus is another. AWS is an example of a commercial provider of an environment like this, fully API'd for ease of use. before the "cloud" movement, none of this was even remotely easy to do...so the need is there.

i'm sorry, but i'm not interested in quoting the definition for you, feel free to read up:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cloud_computing [wikipedia.org]

wait a sec... it's a linux distro with some python (1)

hxnwix (652290) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248191)

I was misled by the summary. This isn't a whole new OS from the ground up - it's a Linux distro with some python code included.

Is a Linux distro with some python the new Linux? Umm... yeah... how about no.

Re:wait a sec... it's a linux distro with some pyt (2)

Vairon (17314) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248407)

I don't believe it's a Linux distribution because it's intended to be installed on Fedora, RHEL, Debian, Ubuntu, etc.

http://wiki.openstack.org/InstallInstructions/Nova [openstack.org]

Re:wait a sec... it's a linux distro with some pyt (1)

MattW (97290) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248613)

It's meant to be syllogistic.

As in:

Linux:Operating Systems::OpenStack:Cloud

At this point, though, OpenStack is still pre-1.0, perhaps equivalent to Linux circa 1993. Whether it can polish up and continue to deliver what is needed is yet to be seen.

The impetus behind cloud right now means that this will be a lot more high profile than Linux was in 1993. There's all sorts of politics (eg Why Citrix Left Openstack [forbes.com] ) at play, and no one has an OpenStack cloud of any significant size running. OpenStack has been tooting its horn for 18+ months and yet the most advanced player is really just going into production [theinquirer.net] . Rackspace clearly sees OpenStack as an avenue to leverage outside development in an effort to go after Amazon, but whether that makes it viable for other people - and thus creates a rewarding ecosystem - has yet to be seen.

Re:what problem does OpenStack address? (2)

Vairon (17314) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248305)

OpenStack runs on Linux.

No just marketing BS (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248753)

We have a stupid research group that is always chasing after the latest trend. "The cloud" is their new shit and they want OpenStack bad. They don't know why they want it, they just do. Of course when our Linux guy sets it up for them, they can't use it because they have no idea how. They don't like the idea of just using VMWare for some reason. It isn't cool enough to them.

Re:what problem does OpenStack address? (2)

Instine (963303) | more than 2 years ago | (#40249007)

Yes.

Though I think AppScale is the way forward. I've looked at this who scaleable PaaS, node image thing for a while now, and here's where I'm at: What these things should do is what AppScale is doing. Offering a homogeneous node that has the potential to fulfill any or all rolls of a horizontally scalable webservice stack. Like a stem cell. It affords you encapsulation to the server level. Usually a virtual server. This is harder than it sounds, and more important than you may think.

That is, its servers become instances of a class of node, if you like. This is very important regarding scalability, as it reduces devops complexity massively. You have no config nightmare. No special cases, no spread of hostname and ip configs throughout your spring, ruby, grails, maven, ivy, .... You have one yaml file that contains a list of server IPs. And if you want, specifies roles for each (datastore, app server, etc...). Maybe not even that.

When you deploy new code it spread over all nodes. No config needed. When you want another node, no config needed. It's beautiful. Yes you could build something this horizontally scalable yourself with the tools the have, but its a LOT of work, and generally, people get it wrong. It becomes messy, with many configs, and poor scaling factors. Projects like this encapsulate the job of doing this assembling scalable technologies and auto configuring then. They are very valuable to those who need them (building things like large multi-tenanted SaaS solutions). Because the headache of rolling your own or coping without is quite a problem.

Surprisingly hyped platform (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248101)

There must have been a lot of development going on in the OpenStack camp during the past year. Last time I checked many features that were already available in other open source cloud platform products were work-in-progress and setting up and configuring a functional private cloud was cumbersome at best. I wonder how they have managed to gain such publicity and backing over more mature competitors.

Re:Surprisingly hyped platform (1)

ISoldat53 (977164) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248807)

All it needs now is a movie about the founders and it'll be ready for an IPO.

Better question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248115)

Is slashdot the new infoworld?

Whenever I read a summary and think, this sounds like infoworld - it is.

OpenStack is the new Linux (2)

aglider (2435074) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248177)

Just like Linux has been the new DOS.
No way to compare pears and beans.

Re:OpenStack is the new Linux (2)

aglider (2435074) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248197)

... and, most important thing, OpenStack [wikipedia.org] is NEITHER an operating system, NOR a kernel.
And Linux has not been the new television!

Oh please. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248249)

Any time the word "cloud' is used, a real tech wants to punch you in the face.
"The cloud" is a title so we don't have explain how the internet works to moronic Mr.CEO and pals.

Re:Oh please. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248393)

Unfortunately, those pals were the folks in Marketing.

Re:Oh please. (1)

Bengie (1121981) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248583)

To me, the word "cloud" describes a type of service, but most marketing uses it to describe anything that involves the network.

Re:Oh please. (1)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248645)

Any time the word "cloud' is used, a real tech wants to punch you in the face. "The cloud" is a title so we don't have explain how the internet works to moronic Mr.CEO and pals.

Amen, brother. It's really getting annoying to me lately.

Re:Oh please. (3, Informative)

MattW (97290) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248685)

There's a term used called "cloudwashing" that covers inappropriate use of the term cloud, but cloud technology is real and every company in tech is pouring money into this transition.

Anyone who has worked in IT in large enterprise has seen the benefits of virtualization in action; there's an enormous amount of capex and opex savings, and VMware basically dominates the market. There's a reason 99%+ of the Fortune 500 have an ELA with them.

The same principles behind that revolution are now reaching into the public space, and looking to blend the private IT compute farms with public cloud resources as well; plus more apps being deployed as SaaS, and more apps being developed on PaaS stacks; all the technology of big data (eg, Mongo), messaging (eg RabbitMQ), and so on just form a virtuous circle with this trend. Apps become more able to run in generic clouds without requiring very specific hardware control, and thus IaaS clouds become more attractive.

If you're in system, network, storage, or security administration, or IT of any sort, and you're not learning about this, you're basically a COBOL programmer waiting to be put out to farm.

Re:Oh please. (3, Insightful)

Dcnjoe60 (682885) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248911)

There's a term used called "cloudwashing" that covers inappropriate use of the term cloud, but cloud technology is real and every company in tech is pouring money into this transition.

Anyone who has worked in IT in large enterprise has seen the benefits of virtualization in action; there's an enormous amount of capex and opex savings, and VMware basically dominates the market. There's a reason 99%+ of the Fortune 500 have an ELA with them.

The same principles behind that revolution are now reaching into the public space, and looking to blend the private IT compute farms with public cloud resources as well; plus more apps being deployed as SaaS, and more apps being developed on PaaS stacks; all the technology of big data (eg, Mongo), messaging (eg RabbitMQ), and so on just form a virtuous circle with this trend. Apps become more able to run in generic clouds without requiring very specific hardware control, and thus IaaS clouds become more attractive.

If you're in system, network, storage, or security administration, or IT of any sort, and you're not learning about this, you're basically a COBOL programmer waiting to be put out to farm.

Funny, we just hired two COBOL programmers at $80K each to maintain some legacy mainframe systems. When cloud technology can permit hard core data entry, say for insurance records or the like, then I'll worry. But until then, throughput is more important than an app being able to run from wherever in the cloud. Besides, in my line of business. We don't run apps. We run programs that process millions of secure transactions. We have data entry clerks that key documents and data that can't be captured electronically.

You would probably say that we have our own private cloud. I would say that we have our own methods to allow secure access to our internal systems. By the way, I would predict that there will be COBOL programmers still programming even after cloud computing has been replaced with the next marketing hyped phrase.

Re:Oh please. (3, Insightful)

MattW (97290) | more than 2 years ago | (#40249497)

Funny, we just hired two COBOL programmers at $80K each to maintain some legacy mainframe systems.

This reminds me of a guy I knew in ~1994, who was griping that all his experience was in COBOL, and after getting laid off from making $75k/year, he couldn't find another job. At the time, I was in college, and so I wasn't really familiar with the idea of keeping your skills updated...

When cloud technology can permit hard core data entry, say for insurance records or the like, then I'll worry. But until then, throughput is more important than an app being able to run from wherever in the cloud. Besides, in my line of business. We don't run apps. We run programs that process millions of secure transactions. We have data entry clerks that key documents and data that can't be captured electronically.

You would probably say that we have our own private cloud. I would say that we have our own methods to allow secure access to our internal systems. By the way, I would predict that there will be COBOL programmers still programming even after cloud computing has been replaced with the next marketing hyped phrase.

So I don't know that I would recommend cloud for you; there are reasons to use it, and reasons not to use it. As the technology and ops experience matures, it will be easier to adopt - basically like any tech. But for almost everyone, there are real benefits. Both capex and opex; and some people are using cloud in a way that their capex savings is ~0 (or negative) but their opex savings is huge. (See: Netflix running their entire infrastructure with 3 admins) Program ~= App. I file my expenses through an Oracle app, that runs in a cloud, that automatically fetches corporate card transactions from Visa, and lets me roll them into an expense report.

I'm one of the authors of Securing the Virtual Environment [amazon.com] , and my co-author is a QSA, and one of the points of writing the book was to talk about the fact that cloud *can* be secure and can be compliant. (Although in the case of a public cloud, obviously compliance requires underlying compliance by your provider, as well as your own processes) Of course, there are a bunch of risks, too - but there are, for example, cloud services that have passed HIPAA and FISMA audits.

In short, cloud is more than just a buzzword; it's an evolution in the technology that powers IT. I'd say it's more evolution than revolution, but it is more than a buzzword.

Re:Oh please. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40249855)

More than a buzzword? Ahhhhh bullshit you fucking idiot. It's the mainframe reinvented with all the problems not solved.

You are a dickhead

Question in the title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248403)

Someone once said, when there's a question in the title, the answer is NO. That's definitely the case here.
 
 

Like Linux, OpenStack aims to provide a kernel around which all kinds of software vendors can build businesses

Ah yes, I remember the original post from Linus, where he said, "I aim to provide a kernel around which all kinds of software vendors can build businesses." That's exactly why he did it. That's exactly how he talks.

No (5, Funny)

Pf0tzenpfritz (1402005) | more than 2 years ago | (#40248535)

As a "cloud OS for the datacenter" Open Stack clearly has to iconoclast on empowering croud-sorced segregation-effects within the namespace of its initial synergies. Anything else would be a paradigm shift.

Re:No (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40250317)

Linux controls the life-cycle of applications the way open stack wants to manage the life-cycle of VMs.
I think a "Beowulf cluster" would be a better technology to make the "New Linux".

Smoke everywere (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40248849)

is it smoke, vapor or just hype?

Does this mean... (1)

Archeopteryx (4648) | more than 2 years ago | (#40249913)

...we will hear every year for the next 20 how this year is the year of OpenStack on the desktop?

"the New Linux" is an analogy (you literal dorks) (3, Interesting)

mounthood (993037) | more than 2 years ago | (#40250055)

"the New Linux" is an analogy (you literal dorks). From the FAQ http://openstack.org/projects/openstack-faq/ [openstack.org]

What does it mean for the cloud ecosystem?

This is not yet code that comes with certification from operating system or hardware vendors. Instead it's aimed at providers, institutions, and enterprises with highly technical operations teams that have the capabilities and needs to turn physical hardware into large-scale cloud deployments.

Still, wide adoption of an open-source, open-standards cloud should be huge for everyone. It means customers won't have to fear lock-in and technology companies can participate in a growing market that spans cloud providers.

A great analogy comes from the early days of the Internet: the transition away from fractured, proprietary flavors of UNIX toward open-source Linux. An open cloud stands to provide the same benefits for large-scale cloud computing that the Linux standard provided inside the server.

Re:"the New Linux" is an analogy (you literal dork (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40250667)

They could have made it clear by saying something like "OpenStack is to cloud solutions what Linux was to the many proprietary flavors of Unix"
As it was written, I read past the headline to find about the next new OS.

"The most far-reaching"? (1)

Xtifr (1323) | more than 2 years ago | (#40250281)

Considering that a full Debian system (binaries for one platform) comes on eight DVDs, I think this project, whatever it might be, has a long way to go before it can really claim to be the "most far-reaching open source project." More mainstream, perhaps, but far less ambitious.

OpenStack, no (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40250307)

OpenStack is the answer to CPanel or Plesk, nothing more.

Here's why:

The software installed is not installed in an optimal manner, nor is it even remotely efficient.

So where you might only need one highly-tuned VM, you need instead 10 poorly tuned VM's to get the same performance. This allows Amazon and other Cloud providers to charge you by the hour at 10 times the amount. So please don't use pre-produced Linux installs in cloud infrastructure that bills you by CPU hours (no, they don't give you any credit for idle time either.)

If you're willing to go the extra mile and fine-tune everything to fit the clould VM so you can use 100% of it (you must make sure you disable page-file usage, otherwise your disk i/o charges will add up quickly) you've already spent 80% of the time it would have been to create the images offline.

It's like why the hell do people insist on re-inventing the wheel.

Make a program in straight ASM, it's 100% efficient
Make a program in C, it's 90% efficient
Make a program in C++,C#,OBJC it's 80% efficient
Make a program in Java, Javascript, Perl, or some other interpreted language, it's now 40% efficient
Make a program in HTML5+Javascript or Flash it's 10% efficient

The same for virtual Machines:
Install the OS on bare metal 100% efficient
Install an OS in a Hypervisor on bare metal, it's 90% efficient+1GB ram lost
Install the OS in a OS Paravirtualized, it's 80% efficient, and will die under heavy loads
Install multiple OS's in a Hypervisor on bare metal, with deduplication, each VM is now about 85% efficient if they run the same OS or 60% efficient if they're different, including different patch levels.

One bad sector on any hard drive= all virtual machines lost.

So I don't understand why anyone would use Virtualization at all. The only proper way to setup cloud infrastructure requires a much larger investment:
2 NAS+2VM hosts, so 4 physical machines. But in a high density setup, these 4 machines must be independent from each other, with their own UPS, power supplies, ram and networking. You can stack additional ones on top (eg 4+4, 6+6) until you meet the power draw limit in the cabinet, but you still need a minimum of 2 cabinets with two separate power supply sources.

The NAS systems are iSCSI accessed, to provide virtual hard drives for the VM machines. The NAS's are connected to each other to keep copies and load balance.

Inside your VM setup, in a LAMP stack, you always setup the file system against the same iSCSI mount locations, so that in the event of the VM hardware failing, you can restart the VM on the other VM hardware with no delay. If you need to share data, then on your first VM, you should set it up to share it's shared iSCSI mounts, and on all your additional machines VM's you mount the share to the same location instead of calling the iSCSI server.

There's lots of fun logic behind this too, like using PXE to boot the VM's so there's no physical drives in the VM machines.

If you need more than one copy of the VM, then you can use PXE to literately boot a copy from the NAS hardware. Or if the virtualizing software supports it, clone it. Subject to licencing.

Year of the... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40250315)

It's not "the new Linux" until somebody on Slashdot proclaims:

"2012 is the Year of Open Stack in/on [the] {Desktop, Cloud, Mobile, Laptop, Dead Badger, etc.}"

There. Now it's the new Linux.

Can....what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40250687)

Can pianos become the new kaxons? They both make sound, but one sound is nicer!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>