Hi all, The feature Dedicated Resources "Private pod, cluster and host" is updated with some changes. Here is the updated FS: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Dedicated+Resources+-+Private+pod%2C+cluster%2C+host+Functional+Spec
Overview of updates to the feature requirement: 1. Implicit Dedication: Admin can "implicitly" dedicate resources. Implicit dedication can be for a zone/pod/cluster/host, but not associated with any domain or account. 2. A new flag in Service Offering, will indicate whether implicit dedication is required or not. 3. Explicit Dedication: Admin will explicitly dedicate resources to domain/account. 4. A new parameter in deployVirtulMachine API will indicate whether to use explicitly dedicated resources or not. So I am planning to add a new planner that will process dedication and modify existing planners/allocators to make sure dedicated-resources will not be used if any of the above flag is not specified. Any thoughts/comments? Thanks, Deepti > -----Original Message----- > From: Hari Kannan [mailto:hari.kan...@citrix.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 12:23 PM > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org; Kiran Koneti > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods, Clusters, Hosts > to a domain > > Deepti, > Regarding, no.5, I concur with your statement. However, we also assume > that this scenario would not arise i.e. theoretically, in a cloud, a service > provider always has capacity i.e. request for a VM should not fail, unless > there are any specific conditions attached (such as request with a tag and > there is no host that has that tag available etc.) > > Hari > > -----Original Message----- > From: Deepti Dohare [mailto:deepti.doh...@citrix.com] > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 9:44 PM > To: Kiran Koneti > Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods, Clusters, Hosts > to a domain > > Hi Kiran, > See my comments inline. > > Thanks > Deepti > > -----Original Message----- > From: Kiran Koneti > Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2013 3:16 PM > To: Deepti Dohare > Cc: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Regarding the Dedicated Resources - Private pod, cluster, host > Functional Spec . > > Hi Deepti , > > I have gone through the FS located in the below location and have some > questions regarding the feature. > > FS Link: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Dedicated+Reso > urces+-+Private+pod%2C+cluster%2C+host+Functional+Spec > > Here are the List of Questions: > > 1) Is the "Dedicated Resources Specific to OS on Dedicated HW" Feature > also added to the same FS.(as I see that both got merged to a single feature.) > > [deepti] Are you asking about this feature: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/VMs+on+hardw > are+dedicated+to+a+specific+account ? This feature is combined with the > feature: Private pod, cluster, host (see the 2nd row in the table). > > 2) How are we going to dedicate the pod/cluster/host to a particular > account(are we using only api's or there any UI changes also to implement > the same.) > > [deepti] We are going to dedicate the resources using APIs only which will be > added as a part of the plugin. > > 3) If I dedicate a pod to an account then it is equal that I dedicated > the > cluster as well as the hosts in that cluster to the account? > > [deepti] If we dedicate a pod to an account, then all the clusters and hosts > inside the pod will be automatically dedicated to that account. > > 4) Adding to the above if I have a cluster with two hosts then can I > dedicate each host to a different account? > > [deepti] Yes we can dedicate two clusters to two accounts unless clusters or > pods to which the host belongs, is not dedicated to any account/domain. > > 5) I have a host dedicated to an account but if I won't use the Service > offering with "isdedicated" to true and use any other offering will the VM be > deployed? (case is there are no other non dedicated hosts in the pool.) > > [deepti] According to me, the vm deploy operation will fail if there are no > non-dedicated hosts available. Will confirm this scenario. > > 6) Will we use the UUID or just the ID of the pod/cluster/host in the > api to > dedicate a particular host. > > [Deepti] We are using only the UUIDs of the pod/cluster/host to dedicate > the resource. > > 7) Can we implement the same in the Upgraded environment also (If the > "UUID" concept is used as the hosts upgraded from 2.2.14 doesn't contain > theUUID's). > > [deepti] Like all other APIs, this use case will also be taken care of. > > > Regards, > Kiran. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ram Ganesh [mailto:ram.gan...@citrix.com] > > Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 1:00 AM > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods, Clusters, > > Hosts to a domain > > > > Saurav, > > > > Good to see your concerns are addressed. > > > > Regards, > > Ram > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Saurav Lahiri [mailto:saurav.lah...@sungard.com] > > > Sent: 16 January 2013 23:24 > > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods, Clusters, > > > Hosts to a domain > > > > > > Deepti, > > > That's great. Thanks for addressing this concern. > > > > > > Saurav > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 4:24 PM, Deepti Dohare > > > <deepti.doh...@citrix.com>wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > Here is an updated PRD link for this feature: > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/CLOUDSTACK/private-host-cluster-pod.html > > > > I am updating the FS based on the updated PRD, will be sharing it > > > soon. > > > > > > > > Saurav, > > > > Please see comments inline.. > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Deepti > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: Saurav Lahiri [mailto:saurav.lah...@sungard.com] > > > > > Sent: Friday, January 11, 2013 5:29 PM > > > > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > > Cc: Alex Huang > > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods, > > > Clusters, > > > > Hosts > > > > > to a domain > > > > > > > > > > Deepti, > > > > > From the functional spec it appears that domains that have been > > > assigned > > > > > dedicated pods/cluster/hosts will be restricted to only these > > > dedicated > > > > > elements. > > > > > It appears to imply that domains can use either share or > > > > > dedicated > > > > elements > > > > > but not both. Or can they use both types? > > > > > > > > [deepti] Based on the status of the flags (mentioned in the link), > > > domain > > > > can use dedicated or shared resources. > > > > > > > > > > A use case[ not an entirely hypothetical use case] where I see > > > > > the > > > > described > > > > > behaviour might be a limitation is where a customer would like > > > > > to > > > have > > > > both > > > > > the offerings based on the type of their requirement. They would > > > expect > > > > > that shared environment would be less expensive than dedicated > > > > > environment and they would want to continue hosting perhaps > > > > > their test/dev environment on the shared environment. But for > > > > > the > > > business apps > > > > > they would like to use the dedicated environment. > > > > > > > > > > With the current proposal do u think there is a way to achieve > > > > > this > > > and > > > > > provide this is in a easy to use manner. > > > > > Do we want to add a shared/dedicated flag with each vm instance > > > creation > > > > > the way Nitin had suggested. > > > > > Just a thought to raise discussion around this use case. > > > > > > > > > > Thoughts?? > > > > > > > > [deepti] Thanks for the suggestion. We will have a dedication > > > > flag > > > in > > > > service offering, which will let the user choose which resources > > > > he > > > want ( > > > > dedicated or non-dedicated) which I think will handle the use case > > > you have > > > > mentioned. > > > > > > > > If there is no available resources with the domain having > > > > dedicated resources, CloudStack will allow the user to use > > > > non-dedicated > > > resources > > > > based on the global parameter "Implicit dedication flag". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > Saurav Lahiri > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Deepti Dohare > > > > > <deepti.doh...@citrix.com>wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Alex for pointing out. I will update the FS keeping > > > > > > your > > > points > > > > > > in mind. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@citrix.com] > > > > > > > Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2013 7:09 AM > > > > > > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods, > > > Clusters, > > > > > > Hosts > > > > > > > to a domain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Deepti, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your wiki has references to defunct wiki/bug tracking. > > > > > > > Please correct > > > > > > that by > > > > > > > moving those into the apache wiki/jira. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't think the two FSes has enough details for review yet > > > but > > > > > > > based on APIs posted, I can see the way it is heading so I > > > > > > > want > > > to > > > > > > > make some requirements on the direction. Dedication is not > > > > > > > an integral part of cloudstack. This requirement means the > > > following > > > > things. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - You should not add dedication as an integral part of the > > > > > > > organization > > > > > > units > > > > > > > such as zone, pod, and cluster. It should be in steps > > > reflected in > > > > > > > the > > > > > > API. For > > > > > > > example, from an API standpoint, it should be > > > > > > > - admin adds a pod > > > > > > > - admin dedicates the pod to a domain > > > > > > > - admin enables pod. > > > > > > > - UI can makes these three calls on behalf of the admin if > > > > > > > you > > > want > > > > > > > to introduce a easy step. > > > > > > > - You should add a plugin that adds dedication apis and > > > implements a > > > > > > > deployment planner interface. > > > > > > > - In cloudstack's core code itself, you should modify the > > > following > > > > > > things. > > > > > > > - service offering should carry a planner name to use. > > > > > > > - deploy vm code should use the planner that's > > > specified in > > > > > > > the > > > > > > service > > > > > > > offering. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > From: Deepti Dohare [mailto:deepti.doh...@citrix.com] > > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 11:33 AM > > > > > > > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate Pods, > > > > > > > > Clusters, Hosts to a domain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Based on the discussion, we have 2 separate features: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 1. Private pod, cluster, host 2. VMs on hardware dedicated > > > > > > > > to a specific account Functional specs for these 2 > > > > > > > > features are posted on Apache CloudStack > > > wiki: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/FS+for+VMs+on > > > > > > > > +hardware+dedicated+to+a+specific+account > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Dedicated+Res > > > > > > > o > > > > > > > > urces+-+Private+pod%2C+cluster%2C+host+Functional+Spec > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is the first draft, and modifications will be done > > > > > > > > along > > > the > > > > way. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > Deepti > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: Hari Kannan [mailto:hari.kan...@citrix.com] > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 10:30 PM > > > > > > > > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate > > > > > > > > > Pods, Clusters, Hosts to a domain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Nitin, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please see inline > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hari > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > From: Nitin Mehta [mailto:nitin.me...@citrix.com] > > > > > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 9:01 PM > > > > > > > > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate > > > > > > > > > Pods, Clusters, > > > > > > > > Hosts > > > > > > > > > to a domain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 27-Dec-2012, at 4:47 AM, Hari Kannan wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Alex, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is no requirement for the end user administer > > > > > > > > > > the hardware - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding the OAMP, I believe the resources are still > > > owner, > > > > > > > > > > administered, maintained and provisioned by the root > > > admin - > > > > > > > > > > they are simply "reserved" for the said > > > > > > > > > > domain/sub-domain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, what would the admin view of all the resources be. > > > Lets say > > > > > > > > > he has dedicated Pod P1 to domain D1 and Cluster C1 to > > > domain D2 > > > > > > > > > and Host h1 to domain D3 then in this case how will his > > > > > > > > > dashboard look > > > > > > like ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hari: Perhaps, the issue is we have a single persona > > > > > > > > > called admin that > > > > > > > > seems > > > > > > > > > to be a catch-all. This admin role is actually composed > > > > > > > > > of multiple roles - I > > > > > > > > see > > > > > > > > > the OAMP task as a provider side role - and hence no > > > different > > > > > > > > > than today from that perspective - i.e. the domain admin > > > (which > > > > > > > > > is the > > > > > > > "consumer" > > > > > > > > side > > > > > > > > > role) need not have access to the provider side > > > > > > > > > resources - > > > this > > > > > > > > > might be a need for Hosting environments, but for a > > > > > > > > > cloud service provider as well as private clouds, I > > > > > > > > > don't know if > > > this > > > > > > > > > is a requirement. I do agree that it would be a nice to > > > have > > > > > > > > > feature > > > > > > though.. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regarding CRUD/Mice's question - I don't believe that > > > > > > > > > > is > > > the > > > > > > > > > > intention - > > > > > > > > For > > > > > > > > > context, Mice wrote " but if further sub-domain is > > > > > > > > > assigned > > > a > > > > > > > > > different pod then it cannot access its parent domain's > > > pod. 2. > > > > > > > > > Sub-domain and its child domains will have the sole > > > > > > > > > access > > > to > > > > > > > > > that new pod. when child domain already has some VMs on > > > parent > > > > > > > > > domain's dedicated pod, is it allowed to assign a pod to > > > the > > > > > > > > > child domain? or the existing VMs will be migrated to > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > new pod?" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > However, I think of this feature more along the lines > > > > > > > > > > of > > > what > > > > > > > > > > Saurav > > > > > > > > wrote > > > > > > > > > " Lets say that the resources on the pod dedicated to > > > > > > > > > the child-domain are exhausted and resources on parent > > > > > > > > > pod are available. In this case will provisioning of vms > > > > > > > > > for the child-domain happen on parent's pod. So > > > > > > > > > essentially > > > provisioning > > > > > > > > > has a affinity for local pods if available. And if > > > resources are > > > > > > > > > not available on the local pod but available on the > > > > > > > > > parent > > > pod > > > > > > > > > then use > > > > > > that. > > > > > > > Would it be good to configure this affinity" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am afraid affinity is not the right thing to configure. > > > The > > > > > > > > > child domain has > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > expectation and is paying for dedicating resources just > > > > > > > > > to > > > > itself. > > > > > > > > > If these resources exhaust we should definitely fail > > > deploying > > > > > > > > > his vm. Instead if we deploy it in its parent dedicated > > > > > > > > > resources and still charge him premium > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > is not correct. We should set the expectations right. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hari: I'm open to either choice - dedication can be > > > interpreted > > > > > > > > > differently - > > > > > > > > If I > > > > > > > > > have some resources dedicated, no one else can touch it, > > > > > > > > > it doesn't mean I don't get anything more - my > > > > > > > > > preference is > > > to use > > > > > > > > > a global to indicate if I > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > draw from parent pool or not, with the default choice of > > > "yes" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also what will be the change in usage ? How will we be > > > metering > > > > > > > > > the end user here with dedicated resources? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I also think we need to have a flag in the service > > > > > > > > > offering asking the end > > > > > > > > user > > > > > > > > > if he/she wants to deploy vm on dedicated or shared > > > resources. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hari > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > > From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@citrix.com] > > > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 9:48 AM > > > > > > > > > > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate > > > Pods, > > > > > > > > > > Clusters, Hosts to a domain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Planners are also plugins. It just means your > > > > > > > > > > dedicated > > > piece > > > > > > > > > > needs to > > > > > > > > > implement a different planner. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We may need some cloud-engine work. Prachi and I > > > > > > > > > > talked > > > about > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > idea > > > > > > > > > to let the service offering contain the planner cloud- > > > engine > > > > > > > > > should use to deploy a vm. You can explore that idea. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But this part is just action acl. This is the easy part. > > > The > > > > > > > > > > more difficult part > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > the read part. How do you limit what they can access. > > > That > > > > > > > > > part you need > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > talk with Prachi about on her design. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there any requirement to let the end user > > > > > > > > > > administer > > > the > > > > > > > > > > hardware > > > > > > > > since > > > > > > > > > the hardware is dedicated to them? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My problem right now is the list of requirements sent > > > > > > > > > > in > > > your > > > > > > > > > > email is not > > > > > > > > > enough. We need to send out a list with regard to the > > > following. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - OAMP. This means (Operations, Administrations, > > > Maintenance, > > > > > > > > > Provisioning) of hardware/physical entities/capacities. > > > Who is > > > > > > > > > ultimately responsible for the OAMP aspects of the > > > dedicated > > > > > > > > > resources? Is it the domain admin/system amdin/ or some > > > new > > > > role? > > > > > > > > > Depending on this, your interaction with the new ACL > > > > > > > > > work > > > can > > > > > > > > > range from low to high. This needs > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > be clearly outlined in the requirements. > > > > > > > > > > - CRUD operations. This means (Create, Read, Update, > > > Delete) > > > > > > > > > > on virtual > > > > > > > > > entities and physical entities. How does dedication > > > > > > > > > affect those > > > > > > > operations? > > > > > > > > > For example, questions asked by Mice in another email. > > > Here, > > > > > > > > > you need to gather up the list of virtual entities we > > > > > > > > > have > > > and > > > > > > > > > specify what it means for that entities in terms of CRUD. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is not a small feature. Tread carefully. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --Alex > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > >> From: Prachi Damle [mailto:prachi.da...@citrix.com] > > > > > > > > > >> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 2:59 AM > > > > > > > > > >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > > >> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate > > > Pods, > > > > > > > > > >> Clusters, Hosts to a domain > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Comments inline. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> -Prachi > > > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > >> From: Devdeep Singh [mailto:devdeep.si...@citrix.com] > > > > > > > > > >> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 4:16 PM > > > > > > > > > >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > > >> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate > > > Pods, > > > > > > > > > >> Clusters, Hosts to a domain > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Some queries inline > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > >>> From: Prachi Damle [mailto:prachi.da...@citrix.com] > > > > > > > > > >>> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 3:04 PM > > > > > > > > > >>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > > >>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate > > > Pods, > > > > > > > > > >>> Clusters, Hosts to a domain > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> Planners and allocators work on a DeploymentPlan > > > provided as > > > > > > input. > > > > > > > > > >>> The caller can specify particular zone, pod, > > > > > > > > > >>> cluster, > > > host, > > > > > > > > > >>> pool etc., to be used for deployment. > > > > > > > > > >>> So for enforcing the use of a dedicated pod, caller > > > > > > > > > >>> can > > > set > > > > > > > > > >>> the podId in the plan and planners will search under > > > the > > > > > > > > > >>> specific pod > > > > > > > only. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>>> If a deploy vm request is from a user belonging to > > > > > > > > > >>>> a > > > domain > > > > > > > > > >>>> which has a > > > > > > > > > >> dedicated resource, then setting the podid/clusterid > > > etc. > > > > > > > > > >> will > > > > > > work. > > > > > > > > > >> However, if I understand correctly there is a > > > requirement > > > > > > > > > >> that no user from outside the domain, should be able > > > >>to use > > > > > > > > > >> the dedicated resource. They cannot be restricted by > > > > > > > > > >> how > > > the > > > > > > > > > >> planner is implemented right now. Should the avoid > > > > > > > > > >> list > > > be > > > > > > > > > >> used? But it doesn't seem like the > > > > > > > > right > > > > > > > > > use of the field. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Yes avoid set lets you set the > > > > > > > > > >> zone,pods,clusters,hosts > > > to be > > > > > > > > > >> avoided by the planner. It can be used for this purpose. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> There may be some changes necessary (like accepting > > > > > > > > > >>> a > > > list > > > > > > > > > >>> of pods/clusters instead of single Ids) but this > > > > > > > > > >>> design > > > of > > > > > > > > > >>> planners should let you enforce the use of dedicated > > > > > > > > > >>> resources without major > > > > > > > > > >> changes to planners. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>>> Doesn't this mean that we are changing the core > > > cloudstack > > > > > > > > > >>>> code to > > > > > > > > > >> achieve dedicated resources features? > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> This change is not necessary; it is an optimization. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Also, another way is to add a custom planner say > > > > > > > > > >> DedicatedResourcePlanner that will search for only > > > dedicated > > > > > > > > > >> resources > > > > > > > > > for the given account. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >>> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > >>> From: Devdeep Singh > > > > > > > > > >>> [mailto:devdeep.si...@citrix.com] > > > > > > > > > >>> Sent: Friday, December 21, 2012 2:58 PM > > > > > > > > > >>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > > >>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: Dedicate > > > Pods, > > > > > > > > > >>> Clusters, Hosts to a domain > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> Hi Alex, > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> I assume some apis will be added for letting an > > > > > > > > > >>> admin dedicate a pod/cluster etc to a domain. This > > > > > > > > > >>> can be > > > > contained in a > > > > > plugin. > > > > > > > > > >>> However, for enforcing that a dedicated resource is > > > picked > > > > > > > > > >>> up for servicing deploy vm requests from a user; > > > wouldn't > > > > > > > > > >>> planners and allocators have to be updated to take > > > > > > > > > >>> care > > > of > > > > this? > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> Regards, > > > > > > > > > >>> Devdeep > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>>> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > >>>> From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@citrix.com] > > > > > > > > > >>>> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 7:21 PM > > > > > > > > > >>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > > >>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: > > > > > > > > > >>>> Dedicate > > > Pods, > > > > > > > > > >>>> Clusters, Hosts to a domain > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>> Deepti, > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>> As Chiradeep pointed out, you should get in contact > > > with > > > > Prachi. > > > > > > > > > >>>> You should plan on this after the ACL change or you > > > can > > > > > > > > > >>>> help out on the ACL > > > > > > > > > >>> change. > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>> For this feature, you really need to think about > > > > > > > > > >>>> the > > > stats > > > > > > > > > >>>> collection side of this because you'll need to > > > > > > > > > >>>> provide > > > a > > > > > > > > > >>>> lot of warnings about being near capacity so people > > > can > > > > > > > > > >>>> plan > > > > > > accordingly. > > > > > > > > > >>>> It cannot be a case of the dedicated resource > > > > > > > > > >>>> explodes > > > and > > > > > > > > > >>>> then they go and work on expanding it. So you > > > > > > > > > >>>> should > > > also > > > > > > > > > >>>> talk with Murali about how to do alerts in > > > > > > > > > >>> his new notification system. > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>> And then in your spec, you need to plan out how to > > > > > > > > > >>>> do > > > this > > > > > > > > > >>>> in a plugin architecture and not modify the core code. > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>> --Alex > > > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > >>>>> From: Deepti Dohare > > > > > > > > > >>>>> [mailto:deepti.doh...@citrix.com] > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 4:32 AM > > > > > > > > > >>>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Dedicate > > > Pods, > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Clusters, Hosts to a domain > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Hi Mice, > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Once a new pod is dedicated to the child-domain, > > > > > > > > > >>>>> deployment of the new VMs will happen only in the > > > new pod. > > > > > > > > > >>>>> The existing VMs will keep running on > > > > > > > > > >>>>> parent-domain's > > > pod. > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Do you have any other suggestion on this. > > > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> - Deepti > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> -----Original Message----- > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> From: Mice Xia [mailto:weiran.x...@gmail.com] > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 4:52 PM > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Dedicated Resources: > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Dedicate Pods, Clusters, Hosts to a domain > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> but if further sub-domain is assigned a different > > > pod > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> then it cannot access > > > > > > > > > >>>>> its > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> parent domain's pod. 2. Sub-domain and its child > > > domains > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> will have the sole access to that new pod. > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> when child domain already has some VMs on parent > > > > > domain's > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> dedicated pod, is it allowed to assign a pod to > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> the > > > child > > > > > > domain? > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> or the existing VMs > > > > > > > > > >>>>> will > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> be migrated to the new pod? > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> mice > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
