On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Eoghan Glynn <egl...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> The harder part is that we need to be able to specify >> independent/orthogonal quota constraints on different flavors. It >> would be really useful to be able to say basically, you can have 2TB >> of memory from this flavor, and 4TB of memory from that flavor. This >> would allow saying something like "you can have up to 3 1TB instances, >> and independently have up to 3TB of small instances as well." > > OK, so its the "as well" aspect that's problematic here. > > (If it were an either-or situation as opposed to a both, then obviously > a combination of the instances and RAM quotas would get you part of > the way at least). > > So just thinking aloud, we could potentially add new per-flavor quota > resources so that for each existing instance-type, there was the potential > to add a new quota limiting *only* that instance type (and maybe keep > the existing instances quotas as an over-arching limit). > > For example, if the following quotas where set: > > instances: 100 > instances-m1.xlarge: 10 > instances-m1.large: 20 > instances-m1.small: 50 > instances-m1.tiny: 100
<snip> > Would that address your requirement? I think so. If these acted as a hard limit in conjunction with existing quota constraints, I think it would do the trick. -nld _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack Post to : openstack@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
