I have created the following JIRA ticket:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2778
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> Thanks, Animesh...I will take a look at the Design Documents link you
> provided.
>
>
>
! :)
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:21 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> I have created the following JIRA ticket:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2778
>
>
> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:11 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@sol
. I certainly
appreciate all of the input I have received on the e-mail list over the
past couple months while I was developing this feature.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks!
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o
mework?
>
> John I added as you as reviewers for Mike's contribution, can you pass on
> your comments.
>
> Thanks
> Animesh
>
> On May 30, 2013, at 9:09 PM, "Mike Tutkowski" <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
as the patch been pushed into Review Board?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On May 31, 2013, at 10:34 AM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> Hi Animesh,
>
> Sure, I'd be happy to do that.
>
> Would you like these comments in this e-mail chain, the design doc, and/or
&
gt; Mike,
>
> good work.
> I notice the burst IOPS. Do you know the mechanism and the config of
> it, like the duration and interval burst IO? Thanks.
>
> -Wei
>
> 2013/5/31, Mike Tutkowski :
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I apologize for being unfamiliar with how I
No problem! :)
On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Wei ZHOU wrote:
> Mike,
> Thanks a lot!
>
> -Wei
>
> 2013/5/31, Mike Tutkowski :
> > Hi Wei,
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Here are the details you requested. This also talks about Min and Max
>
re deleted.
Thanks,
Mike Tutkowski
hostDatastoreSystem.createVmfsDatastore(vmfsDatastoreCreateSpec);
if (datastore == null)
{
throw new Exception ("Datastore '" + datastoreName + "' could not be
created.");
}
System.out.println("Datastore '" + datastoreName + "' was successfully
cre
run on the management server?
Thanks!
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
*™*
Hi Vijay,
I think I understand how to translate this code.
Perhaps you might be willing to do a quick review of what I have when it's
ready?
Talk to you later,
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 8:07 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote:
> Hi Vijay,
>
> I was wondering - if you had a few moments
**confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/>
>
> <
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/**CLOUDSTACK/**<https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/**>
>
> VM+Disk+IO+Throttling<https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/<
> http://cwiki.apache.org/con
al as most storage systems do not yet support them (but they are
intentionally meant for future use by other storage systems per an earlier
discussion with the CloudStack e-mail list).
Talk to you later! :)
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> I believe Wei&#
Sending to the CS e-mail list (I accidentally only sent this to John
before).
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 7:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> Let me see if I can answer your questions.
>
> 1) If we mean provide the ability to charge more for higher IOPS Disk
> Offerings
, though, is technically not a part of the
plug-in, but rather the storage framework (enhancing what Edison built). It
could be leveraged by any dynamic, zone-wide primary storage.
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote:
> Sending to the CS e-mail list (I accidentally only sent t
ave a size anyways that
the VM sees.
Thanks!
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 12:01 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> Hi Vijay,
>
> I think I understand how to translate this code.
>
> Perhaps you might be willing to do a quick review of what I have when it
stackAPIClient.py",
> line 2385, in listUsers
> response = self.connection.marvin_request(command, data=postdata,
> response_type=response)
> TypeError: marvin_request() got an unexpected keyword argument 'data'
>
> Thanks,
>
> ws
>
In cloudstackConnection.py, I made the following change:
-def marvin_request(self, cmd, response_type=None, method='GET'):
+def marvin_request(self, cmd, response_type=None, method='GET',
data=''):
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
mi
27;,
> data=''):
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>
>> I have fixed this in a patch I submitted last week.
>>
>> I'm not sure when it began, but I noticed it a long time ago and h
gt; >> data model (e.g. for billing/usage purposes, expressing offerings).
> > >>2) Should there be a common interface model for reasoning about IOP
> > >> provisioning at runtime?
> > >>3) How are conflicting provisioned IOPS configurations between a
Also, just to be clear, this is all in regards to Disk Offerings. I plan to
support Compute Offerings post 4.2.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:14 AM, Kelcey Jamison Damage wrote:
> Is there any plan on supporting KVM in the patch cycle post 4.2?
>
> - Original Message -
> From
Ah, OK. I tend to re-deploy daily. :)
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Will Stevens wrote:
> I think a lot of people use DevCloud but they don't redeploy very often so
> bugs like this don't get noticed. I use DevCloud all the time.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 a
>
> > +1 : change the plan as listed above
> > +/-0 : no strong opinion, but leaning + or -
> > -1 : do not change the plan
> >
> > This vote will remain open until Tuesday morning US eastern time.
> >
> > -chip
>
>
> -1 (binding)
>
> Lets stick with the current plan of record. IMO - we accepted the 4.2
> timeline knowing we were late, and we could have easily adjusted it
> then.
>
> --David
>
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
*™*
making the attach logic work in
the agent code.
Does that clear it up?
Thanks!
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:48 PM, John Burwell wrote:
> Mike,
>
> Can you explain why the the storage driver is hypervisor specific?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 3, 2013, at 1:21 PM,
een enhancing it to do so. I've got XenServer
worked out and submitted. I've got ESX(i) in my sandbox and can submit this
if we extend the 4.2 freeze date.
Does that help a bit? :)
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> The storage plug-in -
ifficult to maintain and
> enhance. Am I understanding that the Xen specific SolidFire code is
> located in the CitrixResourceBase class?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> > wrote:
>
&g
to support their
plug-in.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:39 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote:
> Oh, sorry to imply the XenServer code is SolidFire specific. It is not.
>
> The XenServer attach logic is now aware of dynamic, zone-wide storage (and
> SolidFire is an implementation of this kind of
boolean isShared() {
return shared;
}
}
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:41 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote:
> For example, let's say another storage company wants to implement a
> plug-in to leverage its Quality of Service feature. It would be dynamic,
> zone-wide storage,
the difference between the ISCSI and
> Dynamic types? Why isn't RBD considered Dynamic?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 3, 2013, at 3:46 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > This new type of storage is defined in the Storage.StoragePoolType class
> > (call
VMware.
On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote:
> As far as I know, the iSCSI type is uniquely used by XenServer when you
> want to set up Primary Storage that is directly based on an iSCSI target.
> This allows you to skip the step of going to the hypervisor and c
n
> terms of Xen ISCSI which why I ask about the difference. Another way to
> ask the question -- what is the definition of a Dynamic storage pool type?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 3, 2013, at 5:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > As far as I know, the iSCSI t
, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:21 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote:
> These are new terms, so I should probably have defined them up front for
> you. :)
>
> Static storage: Storage that is pre-allocated (ex. an admin creates a
> volume on a SAN), then a hypervisor data structure is created to consume
&g
oudstack APIs are added
> to the server. To sync all the changes, similar to how cloudmonkey
> does it you'll need to sync marvin. There is a maven target for this:
>
> See the section on "Sync Marvin APIs"
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/QQzMAQ
>
> --
> Prasann
:) Test
2013-06-04 12:19:47,913 INFO [utils.nio.NioServer]
(NioTestServer-Selector:) NioConnection started and listening on
0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:
I usually just wait for this point in the build and if it halts, then I
CTRL-C and try again.
Thanks!
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer
ent
> operations exposed by the driver to automate allocation. If these
> thoughts/concepts make sense, then we can sit down and drill down to a more
> detailed design.
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 3, 2013, at 5:25 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > Here is the di
ore the attach
logic runs in the agent code?
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 1:01 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote:
> So, the flow is as follows:
>
> * The admin registers the SolidFire driver (which is a type of so-called
> Dynamic storage). Once this is done, a new Primary Storage shows up in the
&g
try to use
'CloudStack volume'.
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:50 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> What you say here may very well make sense, but I'm having a hard time
> envisioning it.
>
> Perhaps we should draw Edison i
-in code will not be called
again to create this SAN volume.
* The hypervisor-attach logic is run and detects the CloudStack volume to
attach needs "assistance" in the form of a hypervisor data structure (ex.
an SR on XenServer).
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mi
dFire's case, does this mean that a LUN gets created as
> well?), as well as, move bits around. As I look though it, it seems
> reasonable to split the management portion of the StoragePoolType from the
> communicate portion.
>
> On Jun 4, 2013, at 3:01 PM, Mike Tutkowski
&
or-webinar-is-sorely-needed.html
> > >
> >
> > I'd actually suggest that a webinar is the right way to do a networking
> > video, so that it's interactive if required... and more easily produced
> > than a finished video product.
> >
> >
It doesn't seem to
> > adhere to the 'mark it removed, let a worker expunge it later after X
> > seconds' paradigm. I only noticed this when a storage system was
> > taking a bit to do the work and thus blocking the API call.
>
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior Clo
nging? If I transition
> a volume to 'Destroy' state, the storage cleanup thread comes along
> and deletes it for me later, similar to how the VMs are expunged. This
> seems preferable, because one could potentially undelete a volume
> within the window.
>
> On Wed, Jun 5, 2
#x27;s just changing a database entry. If it does
> actually do the work right then, then we will need to make it async. I
> haven't even looked at 4.2 though to see if this was addressed.
>
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 10:14 AM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
> > If it's a long-r
t;)
String iScsiName;
@Override
public String get_iScsiName() {
return this.iScsiName;
}
public void set_iScsiName(String iScsiName) {
this.iScsiName = iScsiName;
}
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@so
has already been discussed - why do you want to
> put an iscsi iqn here in volumeVO? Isn't it better to put in a class of its
> own that derives VolumeVO?
>
> Regards,
> Vijay
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
> Sent:
gt; https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Data+Access+Layer
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
> > Sent: Friday, June 7, 2013 3:12 PM
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re:
Perhaps Wei could send me some screen shots of what he's changed in the GUI
for his feature?
Thanks!
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 11:56 AM, John Burwell wrote:
> Wei,
>
> Have Mike Tutkowski and you reconciled the potential conflict between a
> throttled I/O VM and a provisioned
hrottling, but no both)?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 2:12 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > Perhaps Wei could send me some screen shots of what he's changed in the
> GUI
> > for his feature?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> &g
; resolving this conflict?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 3:24 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > Wei has sent me the screen shots.
> >
> > I don't support Compute Offerings for 4.2, so that's not an issue here.
> >
> > I d
Here is my thinking:
Two radio buttons (whatever we want to call them):
1) Hypervisor IOPS
2) Storage IOPS
Leave them both un-checked by default.
If the user checks one or the other, the relevant fields appear.
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 1:38 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.
gt; Actually I still insist that it is better to add the storage-related fields
> in another table.
>
> -Wei
>
>
> 2013/6/10 Mike Tutkowski
>
> > Here is my thinking:
> >
> > Two radio buttons (whatever we want to call them):
> >
> > 1) Hypervisor
What if you specified multiple storage tags that mapped to different
storage vendors' storage?
I'm not sure how they could enter fields for all of those vendors if you
can only select one vendors' fields.
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@so
a drop-down box which includes all
> > supported storage vendors.
> > If users select "SolidFire", min/max/burst IOPS will appear.
> > If users select other vendors, relevant fields will appear.
> > Actually I still insist that it is better to add the storage-relate
A major issue for current QoS providers is not being able to utilize over a
Max amount even when it is highly desirable and the storage system can
support it. That's why I'm thinking it will be a feature others attempt to
imitate.
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 2:44 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
have questioned about.
>
> I accepted John's and your opnion that hypervisor IOPS and storage IOPS are
> mutually exclusion. The way you mentioned is a good way to go.
>
> A small question is, will burst IOPS only appear when storage device is
> SolidFire?
>
> -Wei
>
>
Right...all of that makes sense to me, Edison.
I think John's concern with my patch file (which implements the approach
you outlined in your last paragraph) is that he didn't like the "attach"
command performing logic to create an SR if the SR isn't present.
He wanted a new hypervisor command to
ible to defer Burst IOPS until 4.3 when we could
> address extended driver data in a holistic manner?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 4:44 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > My thinking is that Min and Max are industry standard and Burst is a new
>
More generally speaking, you're looking to remove Burst IOPS from
CloudStack for 4.2, but we would keep Min and Max (and they would be
displayed in the Disk Offering dialog as I've proposed)?
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
I see the unmanaged() method in the life cycle object now (didn't know this
was there before). I also notice it is not being invoked anywhere.
I can make use of this method to help the storage framework determine if it
should send a message to the hypervisor in use to create an SR (or
datastore fo
Min
> and Max IOPS fields in the data model as these seem to generic terms across
> storage implementations.
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 5:57 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > More generally speaking, you're looking to remove Burst IOPS from
> &
That's a good point about the "managed" property being storable in the
storage_pool_details table. We don't need another column for it in the
storage_pool table. In the current url field is where this kind of
information can be passed along and it can be stored in the
storage_pool_details table, if
"+1 -- Burst IOPS can be implemented while avoiding implementation
attributes. I always wondered about the details field. I think we should
beef up the description in the documentation regarding the expected format
of the field. In 4.1, I noticed that the details are not returned on the
createSt
cool.
Thanks!
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:58 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> "+1 -- Burst IOPS can be implemented while avoiding implementation
> attributes. I always wondered about the details field. I think we should
> beef up the description in
Also, if we are good with Edison merging my code into his branch before
going into master, I am good with that.
We can remove the StoragePoolType.Dynamic code after his merge and we can
deal with Burst IOPS then, as well.
On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tut
oud.org/cloud-computing-vids/video/latest/storage-plug-ins-by-mike-tutkowski.html
>
> Jessica T.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 6:41 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> > wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'd be happy to do a video on pr
t; environment.
> >> >>
> >> >> Kelven
> >> >>
> >> >> On 6/6/13 9:08 AM, "Will Stevens" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >Hey All,
> >> >> >I am building integration between CS and an external Palo Alto
> >>Firewall
> >> >> >device. The API calls to the PA device are done over HTTPS. In
> >>some
> >> >> >cases
> >> >> >(like testing or a POC), it makes sense to use a self signed cert
> >>for
> >> >>this
> >> >> >connection.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Currently I have a little http client wrapper which allows the use
> >>of a
> >> >> >self signed cert. Obviously, I do not want to use the wrapper when
> >>a
> >> >>real
> >> >> >cert is used.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >What I am thinking of doing is adding a checkbox on the 'Add Palo
> >>Alto
> >> >> >Device' configuration overlay with an option for 'Using a self
> >>signed
> >> >> >cert'. If this checkbox is checked, then the http client wrapper is
> >> >>used
> >> >> >so the self signed cert will not throw errors, if it is not checked,
> >> >>the
> >> >> >the http client wrapper will not be used and errors will be thrown
> >>if
> >> >>the
> >> >> >cert is not valid.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Is this a realistic approach to this problem? Is this problem
> >>handled
> >> >>in
> >> >> >other parts of the system in a different way?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Thanks,
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Will
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
*™*
nctionality to behave, I can push to
> >get it in earlier than the rest of my code.
> >
> >Will
> >
> >
> >On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> >mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >
> >> I would be quite interesti
Once we understand the dependency graph, we can determine the
> best approach to land the changes in master.
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
>
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 11:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > Also, if we are good with Edison merging my code into his bra
My comments are below in *red*.
Thanks!
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:01 AM, John Burwell wrote:
> Mike,
>
> Please see my responses in-line below.
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 11:08 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > Let me make sure I foll
em separately? I
> ask because the object_store patch is already very large. As a reviewer
> try to comprehend the changes, a series of smaller of patches is easier to
> digest .
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 11, 2013, at 1:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > Hey
how I can come up with this number dynamically?
Thanks!
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
*™*
At one point I tried the following, but it didn't work (the VDI's size was
set too high):
vdir.virtualSize = sr.getPhysicalSize(conn) -
sr.getPhysicalUtilisation(conn);
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I
Also, I've tried leaving the "virtualsize" property un-set, but it defaults
to a fairly small size.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:37 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> At one point I tried the following, but it didn't work (the
Thanks for that info, Anthony.
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:43 AM, Anthony Xu wrote:
> Please notice the maximum size of VDI is 2T,
>
> Anthony
>
> -Original Message-----
> From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 20
at you can develop based on it.
>
> -Wei
>
>
> 2013/6/11 Mike Tutkowski
>
> > Hey John,
> >
> > The SolidFire patch does not depend on the object_store branch, but - as
> > Edison mentioned - it might be easier if we merge the SolidFire branch
> into
&
Took five tries to get the build over this hump a moment ago.
Any thoughts on what's going on there?
Thanks!
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does anyone know if there is a way to stop the build from (very o
nd then un-check the checkbox.
Has anyone else observed this?
Thanks!
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
*™*
, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> Sure, that sounds good.
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Wei ZHOU wrote:
>
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> It looks the two feature do not have many conflicts in Java code, except
>>
ke,
>
> I had this too, working from my home machine and got some hint on this
> list, stating a wireless interface on your machine might be the problem. I
> haven't been able to pinpoint the culprit yet. What is your setup?
>
> Regards,
> Daan Hoogland
>
>
gt; Mike,
>
> I just realized that I forgot to publish my review. I am offline ATM,
> but I will publish it in the next couple of hours.
>
> Do you plan to update your the patch in Review Board?
>
> Sorry for the oversight,
> -John
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:
f merge timing, can you describe the dependencies between the
> patches?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 12:43 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > No problem, John.
> >
> > I still want to re-review it by myself before coming up wit
ecks only implemented in the UI?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 1:02 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > Hi John,
> >
> > Wei and I have discussed making the two features mutually exclusive. We
> > agree with you that only one sh
org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation
> >> _welcomes2
> >>>
> >>> -Sebastien
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thanks
> >> - Mohammad Nour
> >>
> >> "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep
> >> moving"
> >> - Albert Einstein
>
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>
*™*
Hi everyone,
I am planning on heading to London to speak at a CloudStack Meetup on July
4th and was curious if anyone on the list was planning on attending, as
well.
I figured this would be a good opportunity to meet more CloudStack people
in person. :)
Talk to you later!
--
*Mike Tutkowski
uple
> of small fixes in the BASH scripts and even in the documentation (which can
> be an initial assignment for me to fix ;) )
>
> Waiting for a postive response from you folks.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> -
> Md. Iliyas Shirol
> Mobile : +91 9902 977 800
> Go
>
> > Thanks.
> >
> > --
> > -
> > Md. Iliyas Shirol
> > Mobile : +91 9902 977 800
> > Google : iliyas.shirol@ gmail.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> - Mohammad Nour
>
> "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must
ocumented. Do we usually include this type of documentation with
> patches of this nature?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:18 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > Currently they are not yet implemented.
> >
> > We have to make sure they are implemente
n and throws a
> ResourceAllocationException when the QoS definitions are inconsistent. We
> would then add calls to it from each of the VM creation methods in the
> service. Do this type of approach sound reasonable?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 4:30 PM, M
unnecessarily limit
> flexibility. Are my assumptions and understanding correct?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 5:04 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > Hi John,
> >
> > So, maybe I'm wrong about this, but what I was thinking is that we&#x
oTestServer-Handler-2:) Verify done.
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:51,856 INFO [utils.testcase.NioTest]
> > (NioTestServer-Handler-3:) Verify done.
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:52,406 INFO [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Client
> > stopped.
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:52,407 INFO [
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 5:13 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> > Hey John,
> >
> > Perhaps I don't fully understand how Wei's feature works.
> >
> > I guess I thought if you choose Hypervisor QoS, you do so on Compute
&
t; >
> > 1. Is I/O throttling applied to the root disk or all disks
> > attached to the VM?
> > 2. If I/O throttling is applied to all disks, how is the
> > throttling distributed amongst the disks if only one read/write value is
> > defined?
> >
to reproduce.
>
> If we can reproduce it in Eclipse, then it would be very easy to track down
> what's wrong indeed. Otherwise we may need to print debug info everywhere.
>
> --Sheng
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solid
the issue.
> Wonder what
> nslookup 127.0.0.1 shows on your host.
>
>
>
> On 6/12/13 2:39 PM, "Mike Tutkowski" wrote:
>
> >Ah, too bad. :)
> >
> >So, it's not a huge deal. I just thought if we already had a solution out
> >there that I mis
2013 at 3:58 PM, John Burwell wrote:
> Mike,
>
> Please see my comments/questions in-line below.
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 5:37 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> Hi Wei,
>
> So, not entirely sure I follow.
>
> Will what I wrote earli
I agree with your "None" radio button point, John.
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> I hate to say it, but I believe Storage QoS with a Min and Max will always
> be optimal over hypervisor rate limiting.
>
> The
to using hypervisor. This
> approach only works if summing the discrete read/write min/max values to
> get to min/max total IOPS would be acceptable.
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 6:03 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
>
> I hate to say it, but I believe S
As far as compressing read and write IOPS fields into one value (one for
Min and one for Max), that is Wei's area as my feature does not distinguish
between read and write IOPS.
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> I see, John.
It looks like Wei has four new fields:
Max Read IOPS, Max Write IOPS, Max Read BPS, and Max Write BPS
I have two:
Max IOPS and Min IOPS
Mine can be set by the admin or the admin can choose to have the end user
fill in these values.
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Mike Tutkowski
quot;.
If you would prefer to skip this patch, instead run "git am --skip".
To restore the original branch and stop patching run "git am --abort".
--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the
301 - 400 of 2809 matches
Mail list logo
