RE: [DISCUSS] deployment planner improvement
I think that this affects all hypervisors as CloudStack's deployment strategies are generally sub-optimal to say the least.
From what our devs have told me, a large part of the problem is that capacity/usage and suitability due to tags is calculated by multiple parts of the code independently, there is no central method, which will give a consistent answer.
In Trillian we take a micro-management approach and have a custom module which will return the least used cluster, the least used host or the least used host in a given cluster. With that info we place VMs on a specific hosts - keeping virtualised hypervisors in the same cluster (least used) so that processor types match, and all other VMs on the least used hosts.
For cross-cluster migrations (VMs and/or storage) I think that most times people want to move from cluster A to the least used (cluster/storage) in cluster B - making them choose which host/pool is actually unhelpful.
#scopecreep - sorry Pierre-Luc
Amadeus House, Floral Street, London WC2E 9DPUK
From: Will Stevens <wstevens@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: 06 September 2018 19:45
To: dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Marc-Andre Jutras <mjutras@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] deployment planner improvement
If I remember correctly, we see similar issues on VMware. Marcus, have you seen similar behavior on VMware? I think I remember us having to manually vMotion a lot of VMs very often...
Chief Technology Officer
On Thu, Sep 6, 2018 at 2:34 PM Pierre-Luc Dion <pdion@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'm working with a University in Montreal and we are looking at
> working together to improve the deployment planner. Mainly for post
> VM.CREATE tasks.
> Because what we observed with cloudstack, in our case with XenServer,
> overtime, a cluster will become unbalanced in therm of workload, vm HA
> will move VMs all over the the cluster which cause hotspot inside a cluster.
> Also, when performing maintenance xenmotion of VM spread them in the
> cluster but does not consider host usage and at the end of a
> maintenance it require manual operation to repopulate VMs on the last
> host updated. OS preference not taken into account except for VM.CREATE.
> I'd like to work on improving VMs dispersion during and post outage
> and maintenances. when a cluster resources are added or removed.
> Would you have any more requirement, we will document a feature spec
> in the wiki which I believe it's still a requirement ?
> Does using KVM have similar issues over time?
> I don't think it would make sense to cloudstack to automatically take
> decision on moving VMs but for now create report of recommended action
> to do and provide steps to do them. tbd.