[Pacemaker] Resource capacity limit

[Dejan Muhamedagic]

Hi,

On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 02:45:36PM +0100, Andrew Beekhof wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 5:41 PM, Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb at suse.de> wrote:
> > On 2009-11-03T19:15:59, Yan Gao <ygao at novell.com> wrote:
> >
> >> XML sample:
> >> ..
> >>     <nodes>
> >>       <node id="yingying" type="normal" uname="yingying">
> >>         <utilization id="nodes-yingying-utilization">
> >>           <nvpair id="nodes-yingying-memory" name="memory" value="150"/>
> >>           <nvpair id="nodes-yingying-cpu" name="cpu" value="1"/>
> >>         </utilization>
> >>       </node>
> >>     </nodes>
> >> ..
> >>     <resources>
> >>       <primitive class="ocf" id="Dummy0" provider="heartbeat" type="Dummy">
> >>         <utilization id="Dummy0-utilization">
> >>           <nvpair id="Dummy0-utilization-memory" name="memory" value="90"/>
> >>           <nvpair id="Dummy0-utilization-cpu" name="cpu" value="1"/>
> >>         </utilization>
> >>       </primitive>
> >>       <primitive class="ocf" id="Dummy1" provider="heartbeat" type="Dummy">
> >>         <utilization id="Dummy1-utilization">
> >>           <nvpair id="Dummy1-utilization-memory" name="memory" value="60"/>
> >>           <nvpair id="Dummy1-utilization-cpu" name="cpu" value="1"/>
> >>         </utilization>
> >>       </primitive>
> >>     </resources>
> >> ..
> >>
> >> Please kindly review it...
> >> Any suggestions are appreciated!
> >
> > I think this is exactly what we need. Great job!
> >
> > Code looks good too.
> >
> > Andrew?
> 
> Four things...
> 
> Do we still need the limit-utilization option?
> I guess it might be nice to be able to turn it off globally... was
> that the intention here?
> 
> The next one is minor, there should at least be a debug message when
> we filter out a node in native_color()
> Thats the sort of thing thats going to mess with people :-)
> 
> There also needs to be some PE regression tests for this (and be sure
> to run the existing ones to make sure they don't break).
> 
> Lastly, I would really like to defer this for 1.2

Agreed.

> I know I've bent the rules a bit for 1.0 in the past, but its really
> late in the game now.
> 
> Which reminds me, I need to get devel sorted out...

While you're at it, perhaps it would be good to rethink the
release policy. For me in particular it would be great to know at
least one week in advance when there'll be a release. For the
general public as well, since they'll have a chance to do some
testing of the new code. I know that you do test before
releasing, but the more people test in various environments, the
more bugs found. Also, it may be good to introduce and announce
the feature freeze point, after which only bug fixes will be
accepted.

Thanks,

Dejan


> _______________________________________________
> Pacemaker mailing list
> Pacemaker at oss.clusterlabs.org
> http://oss.clusterlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/pacemaker