> On Feb. 6, 2014, 8:41 a.m., daan Hoogland wrote: > > Harikrishna, I would like to see the intermediate option of scale up to > > double the amount as well. Did you revert it? Is there a problem with this > > approach? > > > > Otherwise your submission is fine, of course.
Hi Daan, I did not revert any changes. We can put an option to scale upto double but why it is required if vm can go till 16 (if at all 16 is the correct limit). - Harikrishna ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/17747/#review33778 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Feb. 5, 2014, 5:19 p.m., Harikrishna Patnala wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/17747/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Feb. 5, 2014, 5:19 p.m.) > > > Review request for cloudstack and Nitin Mehta. > > > Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-6023 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-6023 > > > Repository: cloudstack-git > > > Description > ------- > > CLOUDSTACK-6023:Non windows instances are created on XenServer with a > vcpu-max above supported xenserver limits > > VCPUs-max value is changed to 16 and only when dynamic scaling is enabled. > > > Diffs > ----- > > > plugins/hypervisors/xen/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/xen/resource/CitrixResourceBase.java > bf9b068 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/17747/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Harikrishna Patnala > >
