Kelven offered a reason earlier.

"8-host limitation comes from the limitation posted from VMFSv3 for
linked-clone usage. So in CloudStack, it is an artificial limit we post to
reduce possible runtime problems."

It's due to VMFSv3 and usage of linked clone in CloudStack.

--Alex

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 8:46 AM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Raise cluster size limit to 16 on VMware
> 
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:24 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 1:54 AM, Koushik Das <koushik....@citrix.com>
> wrote:
> >> This http://www.vmware.com/pdf/vsphere5/r51/vsphere-51-
> configuration-maximums.pdf mentions that the max. can be 32 for ESX 5.1.
> Any specific reason to make it 16? Also it needs to be seen that this limit
> works across all supported ESX versions.
> >>
> >> -Koushik
> >>
> >
> > Yes - the different versions having different limits complicates things a 
> > bit.
> > 5.1 = 32, 5.0 = 16 4.x = 8?
> >
> > --David
> >
> 
> 4, 5 and 5.1 are all 32 hosts per cluster.  Raw metrics, not using a
> more complex algo to calculate the more realistic cap.  Just curious,
> but are there more specific reasons that we are talking about 4.x
> having a lower number?
> 
> http://www.vmware.com/pdf/vsphere4/r40/vsp_40_config_max.pdf
> http://www.vmware.com/pdf/vsphere5/r50/vsphere-50-configuration-
> maximums.pdf
> http://www.vmware.com/pdf/vsphere5/r51/vsphere-51-configuration-
> maximums.pdf
> 
> -chip

Reply via email to