I didn't know people are granted on voting power. Where did you see that in this community?
--Alex > -----Original Message----- > From: Hari Kannan [mailto:hari.kan...@citrix.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 10:55 AM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Raise cluster size limit to 16 on VMware > > I have no voting power either... I proposed to add this feature (didnt know > there was an existing proposal) yesterday > > Hari > ________________________________________ > From: Musayev, Ilya [imusa...@webmd.net] > Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 1:50 PM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Raise cluster size limit to 16 on VMware > > Though I have no voting power, I agree we should have a config setting for > using linked clone or traditional clone. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hari Kannan [mailto:hari.kan...@citrix.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 1:37 PM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Raise cluster size limit to 16 on VMware > > +1 on making linked clones optional > ________________________________________ > From: Tamas Monos [tam...@veber.co.uk] > Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 1:01 PM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Raise cluster size limit to 16 on VMware > > Sorry for the side-track for a moment but just another reason to get rid of > linked-in clone template management on vmware in the long-run. > I still do not believe using linked-in clones is actually beneficial taking > into > account it drawbacks: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK- > 529 > > Regards > > Tamas Monos DDI > +44(0)2034687012 > Chief Technical Office > +44(0)2034687000 > Veber: The Hosting Specialists Fax +44(0)871 522 7057 > http://www.veber.co.uk > > Follow us on Twitter: www.twitter.com/veberhost Follow us on Facebook: > www.facebook.com/veberhost > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@citrix.com] > Sent: 20 December 2012 16:50 > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Raise cluster size limit to 16 on VMware > > 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 > > >
