Re: Implicit Dedicated Hosts

[Antoine Boucher <an...@haltondc.com>]

Hi Daan et al.,

Following up on my previous message.

My top request for improvement is the handling ImplicitDedication during VM creation.

Business motivation: dedicated hosts are a cost-effective way for cloud customers to manage predictable cloud costs and manage over-provisioning profiles.

The implicitdedicationplanner should be implicit and not require the additional step of having to specify the Affinity group during VM creation.

Regards,
Antoine


Antoine Boucher
AntoineB@haltondc.com
[o] +1-226-505-9734
www.haltondc.com

“Data security made simple and affordable”





Confidentiality Warning: This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s), are confidential, and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, conversion to hard copy, copying, circulation or other use of this message and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message and any attachments from your system.


> On Jan 17, 2022, at 9:57 AM, Antoine Boucher <an...@haltondc.com> wrote:
> 
> Hello Daan,
> 
> Thank you for your reply. Seamless dedication is a critical use case for us.   Members of the dedicated resource should have implicit access based on the set planner, ImplicitDedicationPlanner-Strict or ImplicitDedicationPlanner-Preferred. 
> 
> From the 4.16.0 documentation:
> 
> "For implicit dedication: The administrator creates a compute service offering and in the Deployment Planner field, chooses ImplicitDedicationPlanner. Then in Planner Mode, the administrator specifies either Strict or Preferred, depending on whether it is permissible to allow some use of shared resources when dedicated resources are not available. Whenever a user creates a VM based on this service offering, it is allocated on one of the dedicated hosts."
> 
> Without selecting the Affinity group during instance creation, I would expect the ImplicitDedicationPlanner-Strict only to choose dedicated resources and fail if unavailable, or spillover to other undedicated available resources for the ImplicitDedicationPlanner-Prefered.
> 
> I looked at issue 5803, and it seems to be the same issue. 
> 
> From my logs it seems that the dedicated host never has a chance to be selected:
> [c.c.d.DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-111:ctx-494924a3 job-2176 ctx-735080ac) (logid:3f02ba82) DeploymentPlanner allocation algorithm: null
> [c.c.d.DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-111:ctx-494924a3 job-2176 ctx-735080ac) (logid:3f02ba82) Trying to allocate a host and storage pools from dc:1, pod:null,cluster:null, requested cpu: 1000, requested ram: (768.00 MB) 805306368
> [c.c.d.DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-111:ctx-494924a3 job-2176 ctx-735080ac) (logid:3f02ba82) Is ROOT volume READY (pool already allocated)?: No
> 2022-01-17 09:02:29,996 DEBUG [c.c.d.DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-111:ctx-494924a3 job-2176 ctx-735080ac) (logid:3f02ba82) Deploy avoids pods: [], clusters: [], hosts: [11]
> 
> Host 11 is domain-dedicated to the user from the same domain trying to create the instance.
> 
> [c.c.d.ImplicitDedicationPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-111:ctx-494924a3 job-2176 ctx-735080ac) (logid:3f02ba82) Host 12 found to be unsuitable for implicit dedication c.c.d.ImplicitDedicationPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-111:ctx-494924a3 job-2176 ctx-735080ac) (logid:3f02ba82) Host 12 found to be running a vm created by a planner other than implicit.
> [c.c.d.ImplicitDedicationPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-111:ctx-494924a3 job-2176 ctx-735080ac) (logid:3f02ba82) Host 10 found to be unsuitable for implicit dedication as it is running instances of another account
> [c.c.d.ImplicitDedicationPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-111:ctx-494924a3 job-2176 ctx-735080ac) (logid:3f02ba82) Host 10 found to be running a vm created by a planner other than implicit.
> [c.c.d.ImplicitDedicationPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-111:ctx-494924a3 job-2176 ctx-735080ac) (logid:3f02ba82) Host 9 found to be unsuitable for implicit dedication as it is running instances of another account
> c.c.d.ImplicitDedicationPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-111:ctx-494924a3 job-2176 ctx-735080ac) (logid:3f02ba82) Host 9 found to be running a vm created by a planner other than implicit.
> ...
> 
> Host 11 never gets enumerated.
> 
> Regards,
> Antoine
> 
> 
>> On Jan 17, 2022, at 4:33 AM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogland@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> Antoine,
>> As far as I understand, what you want is a missing feature. You can
>> dedicate a zone/pod/cluster/host to a domain but for the users in that
>> domain to be forced on that domain they have to only have access to compute
>> offerings with the implicitDedicationPlanner *and* when deploying, they
>> still have to select the affinity group for the dedicated resourcegroup.
>> 
>> Your observations are correct and the only thing that is a bit less
>> intuitive (afaics) is that the dedicated resources will only work with this
>> specific setup. There is an issue (5803) out that requires about the same.
>> (maybe a colleague?)
>> 
>> On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 3:37 AM Antoine Boucher <antoineb@haltondc.com <ma...@haltondc.com>>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hello,
>>> 
>>> I would like to implicitly force users of a Domain to use a specific sets
>>> of hosts and block all other domain users to use the said hosts.
>>> 
>>> If I dedicate the hosts to the domain. It will prevent the other domains
>>> to use them and allow the domain owner users to use them explicitly using
>>> the affinity profile.
>>> 
>>> However, I have not found a way to implicitly make it work during instance
>>> creation without having to select the affinity option.  Including using  a
>>> specially created compute offering with the implicitDedicationPlanner
>>> strict or preferred.
>>> 
>>> From the logs, I see that the dedicated hosts are removed right away from
>>> the potential hosts candidate regardless of the user creating the instance
>>> being a member on the domain owner.
>>> 
>>> Perhaps I’m not understanding the feature properly, what am I missing?
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> Antoine
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Antoine Boucher
>>> AntoineB@haltondc.com <ma...@haltondc.com>
>>> [o] +1-226-505-9734
>>> www.haltondc.com
>>> 
>>> “Data security made simple and affordable”
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Confidentiality Warning: This message and any attachments are intended
>>> only for the use of the intended recipient(s), are confidential, and may be
>>> privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
>>> that any review, retransmission, conversion to hard copy, copying,
>>> circulation or other use of this message and any attachments is strictly
>>> prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender
>>> immediately by return e-mail, and delete this message and any attachments
>>> from your system.
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Daan
>