[Engine-devel] RES: Cluster default with empty processor name with PPC64 support

> -----Original Message----- > From: Roy Golan [mailto:rgolan@redhat.com] > Sent: quarta-feira, 4 de setembro de 2013 08:13 > To: Leonardo Bianconi > Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org > Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Cluster default with empty processor name with PPC64 support > > On 09/02/2013 03:35 PM, Leonardo Bianconi wrote: >> >>>> From: Roy Golan [mailto:rgolan@redhat.com] >>>> Sent: domingo, 1 de setembro de 2013 05:07 >>>> To: Leonardo Bianconi >>>> Cc: engine-devel(a)ovirt.org >>>> Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Cluster default with empty processor >>>> name with PPC64 support >>>> >>>> On 08/30/2013 10:51 PM, Leonardo Bianconi wrote: >>>> Hi everyone! >>>> >>>> During the development of PPC64 support in the engine, we faced some UX issues regarding the default Cluster (that Cluster with > empty processor name). >>>> >>>> Currently, oVirt engine allows the default Cluster to contain empty processor name, and the administrator can add VMs and/or > Templates to it. The processor name can be assigned later, editing the cluster or assigning a valid host to it. >>>> >>>> During the implementation of PPC64 support on the engine, the field "architecture" was added to Clusters, VMs and Templates > entities. >>>> >>>> So we have the following questions regarding how the UI should behave: >>>> >>>> - Shall we keep allowing the administrator to assign VMs and Templates to the Cluster with no processor name or assigned > architecture ? >>>> -> If we have an "yes" for the question above: >>>> -- We will have to assign the architecture to the Cluster based on the OS of the first assigned VM, and the processor name > could be defined the same way as currently ... editing the Cluster or assigning a compatible Host to it. >>>> -- The VM creation popup will have to be able to indicate the architecture of each OS ... some OSes have the same > name, and it may get ambiguous since the Cluster architecture is still undefined at that point (before the first VM get already created). >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> Regards. >>>> Leonardo Bianconi >>>> >>> To add VMs you anyway need a running host in the cluster which means the cpu name and the architecture would be the host's. >>> So we can keep the cluster attributes - "cpu name" and "arch" consistent and allow them to be empty on creation. >>> >>> >> Hi Roy! >> >> There is a way to add VMs in a cluster with no hosts running. Steps to reproduce: >> - Initialize the oVirt engine with a new data base >> - Create a new Cluster (I will call it of newCluster) in the Data >> Center Default >> - Add a host in the newCluster >> - Add a Storage >> - Create a VM in the Cluster Default >> Result: The system allows a VM in a cluster with no Hosts running in it. >> >> Is it a bug or a system functionality? If it's a functionality, the issue above can happen. > Just to clear this one - its a functional thing. its a bit confusing but not too complicated: > > Storage and all its related actions/entities are related to the Data Center (aka, code-wise storage pool). Its possible to create a VM > once the DC is up, without a cluster i.e also provision disks to it and so on. > > Cluster is know as the "migration domain" wrt VMs. so CPU arch stuff, network config etc, must be homogeneous in order for VMs to > migrate between hosts which means we must have a running cluster i.e at least 1 running host in it. > Roy, thank you for the explanation! It`s clear now > >> >> Thanks!! >> Regards. >> Leonardo Bianconi

Leonardo - slightly related - is this ppc big endian, small endian? any thoughts on current and future plans around endianes?

also, can you help with my, well, ignorance - are ppc7+/ppc8[1] a newer cpu level, also not backward compatible, etc.?