RE: [PROPOSAL] [CLOUDSTACK-2056] DeploymentPlanner choice via ServiceOffering

[Prachi Damle <Pr...@citrix.com>]

I have updated the FS with some more details regarding the design of this feature, 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/DeploymentPlanner+choice+via+ServiceOffering

Please provide any comments.
Thanks,
Prachi

-----Original Message-----
From: Prachi Damle [mailto:Prachi.Damle@citrix.com] 
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2013 4:50 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] [CLOUDSTACK-2056] DeploymentPlanner choice via ServiceOffering

I think currently how the data disks are allocated is still governed by the same flag vm.allocation.algorithm - as are the hosts - and it will stay the same right now.

Thanks,
Prachi
-----Original Message-----
From: Nitin Mehta [mailto:Nitin.Mehta@citrix.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 11:55 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] [CLOUDSTACK-2056] DeploymentPlanner choice via ServiceOffering

Prachi thanks for your responses. Makes it pretty clear.
Do we also put this in the disk offering as well for governing how the Data disks will be allocated ?

Hari's FS is @
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/FS+for+Granular+Glob
al+Configuration+Parameters. Just search for vm.allocation

Thanks,
-Nitin

On 18/04/13 12:16 AM, "Prachi Damle" <Pr...@citrix.com> wrote:

>Hi Nitin,
>
>Thanks for the feedback. I have added comments inline.
>
>-Prachi
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Nitin Mehta [mailto:Nitin.Mehta@citrix.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 1:42 AM
>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] [CLOUDSTACK-2056] DeploymentPlanner choice via 
>ServiceOffering
>
>Thanks for sharing this with the community Prachi. I read the wiki and 
>had a few questions.
>
>Is there a requirement doc for this ? I wanted to understand the use 
>cases for this.
>>>This is more of refactoring proposal in order to give more 
>>>flexibility to the admin  around deployment decisions.
>>>The typical use-case will be when Admin wants to facilitate 
>>>dispersion of VMs only for some accounts that need it while for any 
>>>other accounts that do not care where their VMs land,  keep the 
>>>deployment random/firstfit.
>>>Since currently planning choice is governed by the global config 
>>>vm.allocation.algorithms, Admin cannot make use of the varied 
>>>deployment heuristics per account needs.
>>>In the above case, if admin sets this config to 'userdispersion' then 
>>>the UserDispersingPlanner gets selected for the entire CS deployment, 
>>>across all accounts.
>
>>>Exposing the choice in ServiceOffering, also lets Admin take care of 
>>>applying any custom pricing for say user-dispersion or 
>>>user-concentrated Vs random/firstfit
>
>Since all the attributes are visible in service offering to the end 
>user what is it we are trying to do here ? Give the flexibility to the 
>end user ? Ideally it should give more flexibility to the admin right ?
>>> Right, Flexibility to the admin. This is not for end-user usage.
>
>You talked about the vm.allocation.algorithms but talking about the 
>planners so I am little confused what is that we are trying to do here.
>>> This is the config that selects the planner currently. If we 
>>>refactor the planner choice to ServiceOffering, we do not need this 
>>>variable for choosing a planner We might have to keep this config 
>>>around in order to provide the choice for host/pool allocation.
>
>I see that Hari also proposed changing vm allocation config to zone level.
>Is that required any more with this change ?
>>>I think so, at least not needed to choose a planner since we bring 
>>>the planner choice to ServiceOffering level rather than Zone.
>>>Can you please point me to that Proposal? Thanks!
>
>I didn't understand "in a CS deployment multiple planners will have to 
>co-exist." bit can you please elaborate with an example here ?
>>> After exposing the planners in Svc Offering, some offerings might 
>>>choose 'FirstFitPlanner', while some other might choose 
>>>'UserDispersingPlanner'.
>>>Thus all planners can get used in the same CS deployment - since the 
>>>choice will no longer be global. All such planners will apply 
>>>heuristics to the same set of resources - hence they might conflict.
>
>Thanks,
>-Nitin
>
>On 17/04/13 5:10 AM, "Prachi Damle" <Pr...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>>I would like to propose a new feature - DeploymentPlanner choice via 
>>ServiceOffering
>>
>>Jira ticket created:
>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2056
>>
>>This is to expose the choice of Deployment Planner via Service 
>>Offering and let Admin use a mix of Planners in a CS deployment.
>>
>>The initial draft of the FS is here
>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/DeploymentPlann
>>e
>>r+c
>>hoice+via+ServiceOffering
>>
>>Please review and comment.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Prachi
>