Hi Matt, I would suggest to let users specify custom topology in Shaker scenario via graphs (e.g. directed triangle would look like: A -> B, B -> C, C -> A), where every pair of nodes is pair of VMs and every edge corresponds to the traffic flow. The above example will be deployed as 6 VMs, 2 per compute node (since we need to separate ingress and egress flows).
I already have a patch that allows to deploy graph-based topology: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/407495/ but it does not configure concurrency properly yet (concurrency still increments by pairs, solution tbd) Please check whether my approach suits your use case, feedback appreciated :) Thanks, Ilya 2016-11-24 19:57 GMT+04:00 Matthieu Simonin <matthieu.simo...@inria.fr>: > Hi Ilya, > > Thanks for your answer, let me know your findings. > In any case I'll be glad to help if needed. > > Matt > > ps : I just realized that I missed a proper subjet to the thread :(. > If this thread continue it's maybe better to change that. > > ----- Mail original ----- > > De: "Ilya Shakhat" <ishak...@mirantis.com> > > À: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < > openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org> > > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Novembre 2016 13:03:33 > > Objet: Re: [openstack-dev] [Performance][shaker] > > > > Hi Matt, > > > > Out of the box Shaker doesn't support such topology. > > It shouldn't be hard to implement though. Let me check what needs to be > > done. > > > > Thanks, > > Ilya > > > > 2016-11-24 13:49 GMT+03:00 Matthieu Simonin <matthieu.simo...@inria.fr>: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I'm looking to shaker capabilities and I'm wondering if this kind > > > of accomodation (see attachment also) can be achieved > > > > > > Ascii (flat) version : > > > > > > CN1 (2n VMs) <- n flows -> CN2 (2n VMs) > > > CN1 (2n VMs) <- n flows -> CN3 (2n VMs) > > > CN2 (2n VMs) <- n flows -> CN3 (2n VMs) > > > > > > In this situation concurrency could be mapped to the number of > > > simultaneous flows in use per link. > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > Matt > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > ______________ > > > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject: > unsubscribe > > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > > > > > > > ____________________________________________________________ > ______________ > > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject: > unsubscribe > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > __________________________________________________________________________ > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
