> -Original Message-
> From: Erik Weber [mailto:terbol...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 17 February 2014 12:55
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Granular Controller Support in CloudStack over VMware
> deployments
>
> I don't think this should
> -Original Message-
> From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@citrix.com]
> Sent: 17 February 2014 11:13
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: Anthony Xu
> Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Granular Controller Support in CloudStack over VMware
> deployments
>
> Sateesh,
>
Regards,
Sateesh
> -Original Message-
> From: Sateesh Chodapuneedi [mailto:sateesh.chodapune...@citrix.com]
> Sent: 17 February 2014 10:18
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: [PROPOSAL] Granular Controller Support in CloudStack over VMware
> deployments
>
> Hi,
>
> I would like
I don't think this should be tied to the template, but rather the
instance/disk. A template could of course specify it's preferred controller.
I don't have a use case for it, but you could potentially want to use
different controllers for different disks. E.g. your ROOT-volume might be
on a high e
Sateesh,
I think if you want to do this then it points to a larger change to templates.
Today, the templates carry no meta information. This means templates should
carry meta information regarding the os image and how to support it. This
should not specifically target vmware. It can benefit
