On 07/31/2012 10:20 PM, Maxim Burgerhout wrote:
Nice, thanks for the info. Can you give a hint of a time frame for
implementation? I'm not asking for dates or even version numbers, just
something along the lines of 'short term', 'mid term', etc.
I'd go with mid-term.
(there is a POC patch for integrating drools which would allow you to
write your own scheduling policies for something like that)
several thoughts here:
1. need to add positive/negative affinity fields to VM entity.
2. make the scheduling logic a supported interface for pluggable
3. implement the drool implementation as a pluggable implementation.
4. support affinity based scheduling
#2 would allow someone to write their own scheduling logic in java code
(well, maybe java wrapping/calling some other language).
#3 would allow someone to write their own scheduling logic using rule
based language with drools.
#4 would mean you wouldn't need #2-#3 for this specific feature.
EB11 5E56 E648 9D99 E8EF 05FB C513 6FD4 1302 B48A
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Itamar Heim <iheim(a)redhat.com
On 07/31/2012 04:07 PM, Maxim Burgerhout wrote:
Can someone tell me whether setting positive and negative VM
rules will be at all possible with oVirt at some point in time,
this on the roadmap?
I need to be able to tell VM's to run on different hosts, spread
around, so to speak. For example, domain controllers would be
running on as many different hypervisors as possible, the way I
That way, the failure of a single hypervisor has minimal impact
infrastructure. I know there is a feature to pin VM's to a single
hypervisor, but that's not quite the same. I would like to group the
domain controllers and then tell them not to run on the same host as
other members of that group as much as possible.
The other way around would be nice as well: have several VM's
run on the
same hardware. For example, a three tiered web application would
probably perform better if the VM's are all on the same
know I could pin them all to the same hypervisor, but still:
quite the same. I want to be able to group the web app VM's and tell
them to try to run on the same hypervisors as the other members
group, so they can move to another hypervisor as a group if the
Apologies if this has been asked before or documented in some
haven't looked yet.
two ways for you to do this today:
1. prefer/pin these VMs to different host
2. use two clusters and put them in different ones
Maxim Burgerhout<mailto:maxim@wzzrd.__com <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>>
Users mailing list