cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gaurav Aradhye <gaurav.arad...@clogeny.com>
Subject Re: Scaling up cpu and memory of user vm above host capacity
Date Wed, 16 Oct 2013 13:46:22 GMT
The old API changeServiceForVirtualMachine too can be used for scaling up a
running vm that too above host capacity (both RAM and CPU) without any
over-provisioning. I have created issue for this -->
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4881

Regards,
Gaurav


On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Gaurav Aradhye
<gaurav.aradhye@clogeny.com>wrote:

> I have logged issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4880 for
> this. I will check bevavior for changeServiceForVirtualMachine API too
> and log issue if confirmed.
>
> Regards,
> Gaurav
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 4:46 PM, Harikrishna Patnala <
> harikrishna.patnala@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes Gaurav, please file a bug ticket for this issue. We should also
>> consider host cpu cores while scaling up the VM.
>> If you want to check for changeServiceForVirtualMachine API, try it on
>> stopped vm since the API is meant for only stopped vms.
>>
>> Thankyou
>> Harikrishna
>>
>>
>> On 16-Oct-2013, at 4:16 PM, Gaurav Aradhye <gaurav.aradhye@clogeny.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Nitin,
>> >
>> > I am able to scale a virtual machine (using scaleVirtualMachine API) to
>> use
>> > 5 CPU cores where as the host has only 4 physical CPU cores. According
>> to
>> > David, this should not be the case. I can also reboot this instance.
>> But I
>> > can't create a new instance with this scaled up service offering which
>> has
>> > 5 CPU cores (Which seems to be a valid behavior).
>> >
>> > Should I file an issue for this?
>> >
>> > This issue seems to be present only for CPU and not for memory. I can't
>> > scale memory above the available memory in host.
>> >
>> > I will check the behavior again for the old API
>> > (changeServiceForVirtualMachine).
>> > I think the old API had issue with both CPU and memory.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > Gaurav
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 10:36 PM, Nitin Mehta <Nitin.Mehta@citrix.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> >> changeServiceForVirtualMachine API was the old API to change the
>> service
>> >> offering for a stopped vm only.
>> >> I think it shouldn't have succeeded for a running vm. Please file a
>> bug if
>> >> this is the case
>> >>
>> >> scaleVirtualMachine is the new API introduced in 4.2 for scaling a
>> >> running/stopped vm. Do read the link I pointed below when you get a
>> chance.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> -Nitin
>> >>
>> >> On 03/10/13 11:50 PM, "Gaurav Aradhye" <gaurav.aradhye@clogeny.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hi Nitin,
>> >>>
>> >>> I was trying on running vm only, but I was
>> >>> using changeServiceForVirtualMachine API instead of
>> scaleVirtualMachine
>> >>> API.
>> >>> But I wonder why changeServiceForVirtualMachine API succeeded in
>> >>> allocating
>> >>> more than host capacity.
>> >>>
>> >>> What is the basic difference between these two operations?
>> >>>
>> >>> Regards,
>> >>> Gaurav
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Nitin Mehta <Nitin.Mehta@citrix.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Gaurav - Were you trying this on a stopped vm ? If you try and start
>> it
>> >>>> with an offering
>> >>>> above the host capacity (including over provisioning ) then it
>> shouldn't
>> >>>> start.  Let me know how it goes.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> More details on scale vm feature @
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Dynamic+scaling+of
>> >>>> +C
>> >>>> PU+and+RAM
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 01/10/13 12:02 AM, "Gaurav Aradhye" <gaurav.aradhye@clogeny.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Thanks David. That disabuses my confusion about the CPU
>> provisioning. I
>> >>>>> was
>> >>>>> using the wrong API to scale up the virtual machine, so above
>> >>>> observations
>> >>>>> stand invalid till I get the same results with the right API.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> About over-provisioning, I have the over provisioning factor
set as
>> 1
>> >>>> both
>> >>>>> in case of CPU and memory.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Regards,
>> >>>>> Gaurav
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:55 PM, David Ortiz <dportiz@outlook.com>
>> >>>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> A machine won't be able to support more cores on a VM than
the
>> >>>> physical
>> >>>>>> processor.  That should result in problems trying to deploy
it.
>>  I'm
>> >>>>>> guessing the service offering is still valid since you could
add a
>> >>>> host
>> >>>>>> later which has a hex core or two cpus in it.  As far as
RAM goes,
>> do
>> >>>>>> you
>> >>>>>> have overprovisioning enabled?
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> From: gaurav.aradhye@clogeny.com
>> >>>>>>> Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 14:00:04 +0530
>> >>>>>>> Subject: Scaling up cpu and memory of user vm above
host capacity
>> >>>>>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Hi,
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I am trying to automate a scenario here. I have only
one host in
>> >>>>>> cluster
>> >>>>>>> with 4 CPU cores and 15 GB total memory. When I try
to scale up
>> cpu
>> >>>>>> and
>> >>>>>> RAM
>> >>>>>>> of a running user vm above the host capacity, it doesn't
throw any
>> >>>>>> error
>> >>>>>>> and I can see the updated values in VM statistics too.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> For CPU, I am able to change the service offering of
user vm as  5
>> >>>>>> cores
>> >>>>>> *
>> >>>>>>> 100 MHz (even though host has 4 cores). I am not sure
how this
>> >>>>>> calculation
>> >>>>>>> is done. Definitely many no. of virtual cores can be
formed on
>> host
>> >>>>>> (more
>> >>>>>>> than 4), but is it possible to allocate 5 cores to single
VM ?
>> >>>> When I
>> >>>>>> try
>> >>>>>>> to deploy new VM with 5 core CPU service offering, then
in this
>> >>>> case
>> >>>>>> it
>> >>>>>>> fails saying not enough server capacity.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Also, For memory, I am able to create 17 GB memory service
>> offering
>> >>>>>> and
>> >>>>>>> allocate it to any running user vm (although the total
memory on
>> >>>> host
>> >>>>>> is
>> >>>>>> 15
>> >>>>>>> GB).
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Any directions? Is this an issue or am I missing something
here?
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Regards,
>> >>>>>>> Gaurav
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message