for Configuration Changes Herry Paul Anderson Gerhard Wickler - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
for configuration changes
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

for Configuration Changes Herry Paul Anderson Gerhard Wickler - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Oct 12, 2023 354 likes •508 views

Automated Planning for Configuration Changes Herry Paul Anderson Gerhard Wickler LISA Conference, December 2011 Boston, US Outline Declarative Approach Example: Configuration Problem Solution: Declarative Tool Solution: Our

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Automated Planning for Configuration Changes

Herry Paul Anderson Gerhard Wickler

LISA Conference, December 2011 Boston, US

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Outline

  • Declarative Approach
  • Example: Configuration Problem

– Solution: Declarative Tool – Solution: Our Prototype

  • Experiment: Cloud-Burst Problem

– Demo

  • Conclusions
slide-3
SLIDE 3

Declarative Approach

  • Most commonly used today
  • Popular tools: Puppet, Cfengine, Chef, LCFG
  • Critical shortcomings

– Indeterminate order executions of actions – Could violates the system’s constraints

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Example: Configuration Problem

A B C

Actions? Current State

A B C

Desired State

Constraint: C must always refer to a running server!

Administrator

Running Stopping

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Solution: Declarative Tools

  • Possible sequences of states

1) A.running = false C.service = B B.running = true X 2) C.service = B A.running = false B.running = true X 3) B.running = true A.running = false C.service = B X 4) A.running = false B.running = true C.service = B X 5) C.service = B B.running = true A.running = false X 6) B.running = true C.service = B A.running = false √

  • Highly likely producing the wrong sequence!

Desired State

  • A.running = false
  • B.running = true
  • C.service = B

Puppet Cfengine LCFG

Submit

Administrator

Implement

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Solution: Our Prototype

  • All actions must be orchestrated as a workflow to

– achieve the desired state – satisfy the constraints

  • Method – using Automated Planning technique

action action pre eff Declarative approach: Our Prototype:

pre: preconditions eff: effects

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Solution: Our Prototype (2)

Desired State

  • A.running = false
  • B.running = true
  • C.service = B

Global Constraint

  • C.service.running = true

Current State

  • A.running = true
  • B.running = false
  • C.service = A

start ( server ) stop ( server ) change ( s1, s2, c ) pre eff pre eff pre eff Actions

Administrator Monitoring Agent Experts, Engineers

Define Retrieve Define

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Solution: Our Prototype (3)

Planner Workflow

Execution Agents (ControlTier and Puppet)

. . . .

Managed Servers

Desired State + Constraints Current State Actions Database

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Experiment: Cloud-Burst Problem

  • Cloud-Burst

– Migrate application from private to public cloud – Address spikes in demand

  • Constraints

– No down-time – Reconfigure the firewall – Full migration but not duplication

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Experiment: Cloud-Burst Problem

Private Cloud VM-X VM-Y WS-A WS-B Private VM-Y WS-B Public VM-X WS-A C Company’s LAN Company’s LAN C Cloud Provider Internet Firewall Actions?

Administrator

Running Stopping

slide-11
SLIDE 11
  • http://goo.gl/Qph7F
  • Cloud-Burst problem

Demo

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Conclusions

  • Our prototype

– Automatically generate the workflow between any two states – Achieve the desired state – Preserving system’s constraints – Enable autonomic reconfiguration

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Acknowledgement

  • This research is fully supported by a grant

from 2010 HP Labs Innovation Research Program (IRP) award

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Thank you!