cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Discuss] AutoScaling.next in CloudStack
Date Wed, 27 Nov 2013 11:15:39 GMT
I have some (limited) experience, it seems the fs[1] refered in this
thread is good enough if you need to expose data. How much of this is
being implemented at the moment?

I suppose you need to design a way for leveraging data from
components, do you? i.e. the monitoriing service from Chiradeeps
picture[2]

Daan

[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/FS+for+Integrating+CS+alerts+via+SNMP+to+external+management+system
[2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Autoscale+framework

On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Nguyen Anh Tu <tuna@apache.org> wrote:
> Anyone can help in SNMP monitoring design? I have very limit experience
> with SNMP :-)
>
> Thanks,
>
> --Tuna
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Vijay Venkatachalam <
> Vijay.Venkatachalam@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Chiradeep,
>>         The monitoring service seems to be collecting statistics using
>> polling and
>>         triggers actions during  threshold breach. This seems to be very
>> tasking.
>>         Can it be designed to listen for events on threshold breach as
>> well?
>>         For ex. a configuration "response timeout > 30 ms" on a VIP can be
>>         sent to LB appliance, the LB appliance can intimate the Monitoring
>> service
>>         when the threshold breach has happened. Basically offloading the
>> responsibility.
>> Thanks,
>> Vijay V.
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com]
>> > Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2013 8:07 AM
>> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> > Subject: Re: [Discuss] AutoScaling.next in CloudStack
>> >
>> > Hi Tuna,
>> >
>> > I boldly diagrammed out what we talked about here:
>> >
>> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/M6YTAg
>> >
>> > The idea is to keep the monitoring part separate from the autoscale
>> decision.
>> > So, the monitoring can be SNMP/RRD/whatever.
>> >
>> > Scale-up using reconfiguration then becomes a mere matter of modifying
>> the
>> > autoscale service.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 11/25/13 8:57 AM, "tuna" <ng.tuna@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > >Hi guys,
>> > >
>> > >At CCCEU13 I talked about the AutoScale without NetScaler feature
>> > >working with XenServer & XCP. For anyone don¹t know about this feature,
>> > >take a look into my slide here:
>> > >http://www.slideshare.net/tuna20073882/autoscale-without-
>> > netscalerccceu13.
>> > >
>> > >Chiradeep and I had a short talk after the presentation about how to
>> > >improve the AutoScale feature in future. We agreed that:
>> > >
>> > >+ Need to remove Load Balancing feature from AutoScaling. That¹s very
>> > >simple to do.
>> > >+ Need to use SNMP for monitoring not only instance-level but also
>> > >application-level.
>> > >+ Also, supporting well KVM hypervisor
>> > >
>> > >So, I blow up this thread for all of you guys to discuss the way we
>> > >design that feature, such as:
>> > >+ technical side, how to integrate effectively SNMP into CLoudStack.
>> > >Where do we put SNMP monitor components into infrastructure? etc
>> > >+ user experience, how user configure that feature with SNMP monitoring.
>> > >I image that user can figure out they need AutoScale for which of
>> > >following items: application, protocol (tcp, udp), port, bandwidth,
>> > >disk, cpu and memory also, etc
>> > >+ How about autoscale action, not just only deploy or destroy VM, we
>> > >+ need
>> > >maybe dynamically increase-decrease memory/cpu, nic bandwidth, disk,Š
>> > >
>> > >Personally, we should think about a completely autoscaling feature.
>> > >
>> > >Cheers,
>> > >
>> > >‹Tuna
>>
>>

Mime
View raw message