cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Logan Barfield <lbarfi...@tqhosting.com>
Subject Re: UI: "CPU (in MHz)" doesn't make sense
Date Mon, 10 Nov 2014 17:49:15 GMT
That was definitely only an assumption.  If each host handles it different
it may be preferable to hard code a "Default" level for each hypervisor
type, as well as a few different levels (e.g., 'Max', 'High', 'Default',
'Low', 'Min' & 'Custom').  This would operators & end-users clear options
to work with, while retaining the flexibility of a custom option.


Thank You,

Logan Barfield
Tranquil Hosting

On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 11:46 AM, Nux! <nux@li.nux.ro> wrote:

> I am not entirely sure if 1 vs 2 = 1 vs 1000. It might be that the one
> with 1000 will get 1000 more prio to CPU compared to the one with 1. This
> needs to be clarified per each hypervisor.
>
> Lucian
>
> --
> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>
> Nux!
> www.nux.ro
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Logan Barfield" <lbarfield@tqhosting.com>
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Sent: Monday, 10 November, 2014 16:23:41
> > Subject: Re: UI: "CPU (in MHz)" doesn't make sense
>
> > I agree completely.  We've set all of our service offerings to equal
> > weights, and hard coded the same weight into the custom offering form.
> > It's a bit too confusing otherwise.
> >
> > The way I understand the weights for (Xen/KVM at least) is that they're
> > just relative, so 1 vs 2 is the same as 1 vs 1000.  That being the case
> I'd
> > suggest a solution that has worked for us in the past: set the weight
> equal
> > to the memory amount (in MB).
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> >
> > Thank You,
> >
> > Logan Barfield
> > Tranquil Hosting
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Nux! <nux@li.nux.ro> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Basically I'm annoyed with the "CPU (in MHz)" usage in service offerings
> >> as they are a lie basically.
> >> Opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-7874 and
> suggest
> >> to have calculated automatically based on CPU cores number or at least
> >> having it renamed to something like "cpu weight".
> >> MHz means nothing.
> >>
> >> Thoughts?
> >>
> >> --
> >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >>
> >> Nux!
> >> www.nux.ro
>

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