That option would probably work too. I do think that it should have a custom option though. No changes should be implemented that could potentially mess with current production environments, so leaving a custom option in for operators that are already using it should prevent that.
Thank You, Logan Barfield Tranquil Hosting On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 12:58 PM, Nux! <n...@li.nux.ro> wrote: > Personally, I'd propose the defaults should be values proportional or > equal to the cores number (that's how openstack does it). > > Anyway, all this doesn't matter as long as no developer is listening. :-) > > -- > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! > > Nux! > www.nux.ro > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Logan Barfield" <lbarfi...@tqhosting.com> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > > Sent: Monday, 10 November, 2014 17:49:15 > > Subject: Re: UI: "CPU (in MHz)" doesn't make sense > > > That was definitely only an assumption. If each host handles it > different > > it may be preferable to hard code a "Default" level for each hypervisor > > type, as well as a few different levels (e.g., 'Max', 'High', 'Default', > > 'Low', 'Min' & 'Custom'). This would operators & end-users clear options > > to work with, while retaining the flexibility of a custom option. > > > > > > Thank You, > > > > Logan Barfield > > Tranquil Hosting > > > > On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Nux! <n...@li.nux.ro> wrote: > > > >> I am not entirely sure if 1 vs 2 = 1 vs 1000. It might be that the one > >> with 1000 will get 1000 more prio to CPU compared to the one with 1. > This > >> needs to be clarified per each hypervisor. > >> > >> Lucian > >> > >> -- > >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! > >> > >> Nux! > >> www.nux.ro > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> > From: "Logan Barfield" <lbarfi...@tqhosting.com> > >> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > >> > Sent: Monday, 10 November, 2014 16:23:41 > >> > Subject: Re: UI: "CPU (in MHz)" doesn't make sense > >> > >> > I agree completely. We've set all of our service offerings to equal > >> > weights, and hard coded the same weight into the custom offering form. > >> > It's a bit too confusing otherwise. > >> > > >> > The way I understand the weights for (Xen/KVM at least) is that > they're > >> > just relative, so 1 vs 2 is the same as 1 vs 1000. That being the > case > >> I'd > >> > suggest a solution that has worked for us in the past: set the weight > >> equal > >> > to the memory amount (in MB). > >> > > >> > Thoughts? > >> > > >> > > >> > Thank You, > >> > > >> > Logan Barfield > >> > Tranquil Hosting > >> > > >> > On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Nux! <n...@li.nux.ro> wrote: > >> > > >> >> Hi, > >> >> > >> >> Basically I'm annoyed with the "CPU (in MHz)" usage in service > offerings > >> >> as they are a lie basically. > >> >> Opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-7874 and > >> suggest > >> >> to have calculated automatically based on CPU cores number or at > least > >> >> having it renamed to something like "cpu weight". > >> >> MHz means nothing. > >> >> > >> >> Thoughts? > >> >> > >> >> -- > >> >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! > >> >> > >> >> Nux! > >> >> www.nux.ro >
