[ovirt-devel] OVN provider's firewalld services deployment during engine setup

[Dan Kenigsberg]

On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Yaniv Kaul <ykaul at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Dan Kenigsberg <danken at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Martin Perina <mperina at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Will OVN provider be mandatory for all engine 4.2 installation? Can OVN
>> > provider be installed on different host than engine? If not mandatory or
>> > "may be on different host", then it should be handled similar way as
>> > DWH, so
>> > it should be in separate package and it's engine-setup part should also
>> > be
>> > in separate package.
>>
>> In 4.2, OVN provider is configured by default on the Engine host, but
>> the user can opt to avoid that. He can then configure the provider
>> manually, and add it manually to Engine. We have already limited the
>> automatic configuration of OVN to the case of it running on the same
>> host.
>>
>> When looked from this perspective, adding an explicit rpm-level
>> Requires, does not make things much worse, it only makes reality
>> visible.
>>
>> > And even if we don't support OVN on different host in
>> > 4.2, we can prepare for the future ...
>>
>> A big question is whether that future includes installing things on a
>> remote host (as in DWH), or alternatively spawning a container.
>> Implementing the OVN deployment to the Engine machine took quite a big
>> effort[1]. I worry that extending it to allow remote host would be
>> even more consuming, it's not a minor preparation but a mid-size
>> feature on its own.
>
>
> I'm not sure anyone answered how heavy (CPU, memory, disk size) it is on the
> Engine.

On another thread, Sandro mentioned the effect on disk size: +17Mb, +2%.

CPU and Memory are much harder to estimate, as they depend on the
number of networks and hosts controlled by OVN. Mor, can you provide
numbers for a small cluster that you tested?

Dan.