Slashdot Mirror


Is OpenStack the New Linux?

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.'"

29 of 185 comments (clear)

  1. Done. by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 5, Funny

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

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

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Done. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

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

    2. Re:Done. by NickFortune · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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

      --
      Don't let THEM immanentize the Eschaton!
    3. Re:Done. by simcop2387 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I always think of Betteridge's Law of Headlines

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

    4. Re:Done. by gman003 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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!

    5. Re:Done. by Smauler · · Score: 5, Funny

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

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

    6. Re:Done. by MrBandersnatch · · Score: 3, Interesting

      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.

    7. Re:Done. by aix+tom · · Score: 4, Insightful

      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.

    8. Re:Done. by radish · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think "Cloud" is less about physical architecture and more about feature set. When I think "Cloud" I think dynamic, quickly reconfigurable, essentially "limitless". Where I work we're moving away from a traditional model where applications are installed on their own dedicated servers with dedicated DB and FS storage to a Cloud model where VMs can be dynamically allocated in seconds, cloned from images and ready to roll. Storage is via EC2 style no-sql object storage and doesn't need to be pre-provisioned. For a small shop this probably doesn't sound very exciting but when you're in an environment with tens of thousands of machines and are used to multi-week wait times for approval, purchasing and install of new hardware it's a pretty big shift.

      So it's not the redundancy, or even use of VMs that's interesting, it's the pooling of resources - having compute & storage be essentially utilities you can take as little or as much of as you need. Places like Google have been doing this for a long time, but it's only recently becoming mainstream in other orgs.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

  2. Meta-engineering by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:Meta-engineering by morcego · · Score: 5, Insightful

      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.

      --
      morcego
  3. Wait, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

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

    1. Re:Wait, what? by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful

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

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Wait, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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.

    3. Re:Wait, what? by MattW · · Score: 5, Informative

      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.

    4. Re:Wait, what? by sp1n · · Score: 3, Informative

      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.

  4. Noise without content by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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.

  5. More clound BS? Not again. by gweihir · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    1. Re:More clound BS? Not again. by metrometro · · Score: 4, Funny

      Big egos are just the hallmark of failure.

      -- Sent from my iPhone

      FTFY

  6. what problem does OpenStack address? by hxnwix · · Score: 3, Insightful

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

    1. Re:what problem does OpenStack address? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

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

      Yes: Not enough free advertising on Slashdot.

    2. Re:what problem does OpenStack address? by MindStalker · · Score: 4, Informative

      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.

  7. Surprisingly hyped platform by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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.

  8. Do you mind if I grab your wallet? by mccrew · · Score: 3, Funny

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

    --
    Hey, Windows users, there is no such thing as "forward" slash, there is only slash and backslash.
  9. No by Pf0tzenpfritz · · Score: 5, Funny

    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.

    --
    Oh, the beautiful gloss of greality!
  10. Re:Oh please. by MattW · · Score: 3, Informative

    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.

  11. Re:Oh please. by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.

  12. Re:Oh please. by MattW · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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, 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.

  13. "the New Linux" is an analogy (you literal dorks) by mounthood · · Score: 3, Interesting

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

    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.

    --
    tomorrow who's gonna fuss