esh Naidu [mailto:somesh.na...@citrix.com]
> Sent: 03 April 2015 20:23
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] How to fix failing VR-mgmt server links
>
> It is true and I like the idea. I would just want to make sure the agent
> footprint isn't too high. A
From: Somesh Naidu [mailto:somesh.na...@citrix.com]
Sent: 03 April 2015 20:23
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] How to fix failing VR-mgmt server links
It is true and I like the idea. I would just want to make sure the agent
footprint isn't too high. As opposed to CP/SS VM,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/03/2015 04:52 PM, Somesh Naidu wrote:
> It is true and I like the idea. I would just want to make sure the
> agent footprint isn't too high. As opposed to CP/SS VM, we expect
> to be a lot more VRs running in an environment.
>
I agree. Wouldn
It is true and I like the idea. I would just want to make sure the agent
footprint isn't too high. As opposed to CP/SS VM, we expect to be a lot more
VRs running in an environment.
Also, the recent VR aggregation, I believe ACS 4.5 has it, did reduce a lot of
that barbaric stuff so we are still
