On 3/1/13 7:14 AM, "Chip Childers" wrote:
>On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 03:18:51PM -0800, Prachi Damle wrote:
>> So far per the scope of the feature, Affinity groups is an entity
>>created by an individual account and can be used, listed only by that
>>account.
>>
>> Wanted to know if we see any us
org
> Cc: Manan Shah; Alex Huang
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
>
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 01:36:20PM -0800, Prachi Damle wrote:
> > Hey all,
> >
> > It seems that host affinity usecase has little value in reality and very
> > less
:00 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Manan Shah; Alex Huang
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 01:36:20PM -0800, Prachi Damle wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> It seems that host affinity usecase has little value in reality and very less
>
On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 01:36:20PM -0800, Prachi Damle wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> It seems that host affinity usecase has little value in reality and very less
> guarantee of success given the current deployment planning mechanism.
>
> The feature requirement says host affinity = same host. So VM's
trix.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 11:45 AM
To: Manan Shah; Alex Huang; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
Hi Manan,
I assume affinity level means affinity type.
For 4.2, plan is to add a framework for processing affinity gro
t: Thursday, February 14, 2013 11:41 AM
>To: Prachi Damle; Alex Huang; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
>
>Hi Prachi,
>
>My understanding is that we would build a framework for allowing admins
>to specify the levels of aff
the plugin implementations to the deployment.
-Prachi
-Original Message-
From: Manan Shah
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 11:41 AM
To: Prachi Damle; Alex Huang; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
Hi Prachi,
My understanding is
013 1:38 PM
>To: Alex Huang; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
>
>Alex,
>
>Thanks for the detailed review. I will couple the affinity design with
>the deployment planner refactoring I had next in line then. Will update
; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
Alex,
Thanks for the detailed review. I will couple the affinity design with the
deployment planner refactoring I had next in line then. Will update the FS with
these details.
-Prachi
-Original Message
; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
Prachi,
If it's an elective option, then it shouldn't have options in the deployvm api.
We can't decouple the code but then say it's coupled at deployvm api call.
I think it makes sense
013 11:39 PM
> To: Alex Huang; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> Thanks for the review, I have answered inline. Please comment.
> I guess the FS needs more description reasoning the 2-component design to
cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
>
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 06:59:10PM +0530, Murali Reddy wrote:
> > On 06/02/13 4:12 AM, "Prachi Damle" wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >As per discussions below, the scope of t
On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 06:59:10PM +0530, Murali Reddy wrote:
> On 06/02/13 4:12 AM, "Prachi Damle" wrote:
>
> >
> >As per discussions below, the scope of the feature now consists of a
> >generic framework for defining affinity groups in CloudStack and a
> >default implementation to support host
On 06/02/13 4:12 AM, "Prachi Damle" wrote:
>
>As per discussions below, the scope of the feature now consists of a
>generic framework for defining affinity groups in CloudStack and a
>default implementation to support host affinity and anti-affinity.
Prachi,
When the granularity of affinity/ant
@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
Hi Prachi,
A few comments about this spec.
- What is the error when planning fails? What details will it give?
[Prachi] I was planning to still rely on the deployment planner to throw
exception since planner will be the
ion of the REST API? Can we start using
the REST only API from here on?
--Alex
> -Original Message-
> From: Prachi Damle [mailto:prachi.da...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 2:42 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Aff
-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 1:22 AM, Chris Sears wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I understand the motivation for a feature like this, but I'm concerned
> that the concepts of affinity and anti-affinity might not
and
deploys 3 Centos 5.6 VHD templates in that group. Each vm will then end up
on a separate host.
>-Original Message-
>From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com]
>Sent: Monday, January 07, 2013 6:30 AM
>To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Re: [DISCUS
e.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 1:22 AM, Chris Sears wrote:
> Greetings,
>
> I understand the motivation for a feature like this, but I'm concerned
> that the concepts of affinity and anti-affinity might not be
> appropriate cl
Ms from a list (via UI)
>>
>> When user specifies VM-A can have affinity with VMs B & C does that mean
>> they should be placed on same pod or same hypervisor(cluster or host) by
>> the allocation logic?
>>
>> -Prachi
>> -----Original Message-
>&g
.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 6:06 PM
> To: CloudStack DeveloperList
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
>
> Actually the proposal is quite vague.
> What does affinity mean to the end-user?
> What guarantees are being asked for?
> - the vms are
A can have affinity with VMs B & C does that mean they
should be placed on same pod or same hypervisor(cluster or host) by the
allocation logic?
-Prachi
-Original Message-
From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 6:06 PM
To: CloudSta
Actually the proposal is quite vague.
What does affinity mean to the end-user?
What guarantees are being asked for?
- the vms are on the same hypervisor (affinity)
- the vms are not on the same hypervisor (anti)
- the vms are interconnected by a high-speed interconnect (affinity)
- the vms are
23 matches
Mail list logo
