cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Evan Miller <>
Subject RE: Externally Managed Clusters - pointer to more info?
Date Thu, 19 Jul 2012 23:38:02 GMT
With the second method, we want ephemeral instances on a per user 
basis (where there is as much host and vm isolation from other users
as possible). We have a reservation system that is used, largely,
by devtest engineers for their test equipment. What we want to do
is to leverage CloudStack (our product :-)) to manage the VMs 
associated with each engineer's reservation.


-----Original Message-----
From: Chiradeep Vittal [] 
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2012 4:04 PM
To: CloudStack Users
Subject: Re: Externally Managed Clusters - pointer to more info?

Sounds about right, although I can't really tell what you want to achieve with the second
method (is it stricter isolation? Ephemeral instances?)

On 7/19/12 3:57 PM, "Evan Miller" <> wrote:

>Hi Chiradeep:
>We plan to implement CloudStack in two distinctly different ways.
>One way is with a pool master and shared storage. The other way is with 
>host+vm(s) isolation (insofar as that is possible) from other hosts and 
>vms. To do that, it sounds like each collection of host+vm(s) should be 
>in different clusters. Is that right?
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Chiradeep Vittal []
>Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2012 3:13 PM
>To: CloudStack Users
>Subject: Re: Externally Managed Clusters - pointer to more info?
>Not sure what you mean by "separation". In an XS cluster, the thing 
>that is shared is the pool master and the shared storage. This allows 
>for VMs to live/cold migrate from host to host. CloudStack still picks 
>the host in the cluster to start the VM. The ip addresses are not 
>locked to any cluster, neither is the memory. That is, a free guest ip 
>can be assigned to a VM in any cluster.
>If you put each host in a distinct cluster, then you lose the ability 
>to recover from failed hosts or to put hosts in maintenance mode and 
>yet recover the vms that were running on those hosts.
>On 7/19/12 2:51 PM, "Evan Miller" <> wrote:
>>Hi Chiradeep:
>>So, it sounds like there isn't a way in the same cluster for two 
>>XenServer hosts to not pool CPU, memory, and ip addresses?
>>To get that kind of cpu, memory and ip address management separation, 
>>it sounds like each host should be in a different cluster. Right?
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Chiradeep Vittal []
>>Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2012 2:20 PM
>>To: CloudStack Users
>>Subject: Re: Externally Managed Clusters - pointer to more info?
>>AFAIK, this is available only for VMWare clusters currently. The main 
>>difference is that vCenter takes care of HA and you can live migrate 
>>using vCenter and CloudStack will cope with the out-of-band change.
>>On 7/19/12 12:31 PM, "Evan Miller" <> wrote:
>>>Running CloudStack Management Server:
>>>  v3.0.2.1
>>>  [root@cumulus management]# uname -a
>>>  Linux 2.6.32-220.el6.x86_64 #1 SMP Tue Dec 
>>>19:48:22 GMT 2011 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>>>  [root@cumulus management]#
>>>Hypervisor :
>>>  XenServer v6.02
>>>Where can I find info on externally managed clusters?
>>>I looked here and didn't find any details:
>>>Rather than tear down my cloud-managed setup and experiment with the 
>>>attribute, I'd rather read about how this feature is different than 
>>>For example,
>>>is there no pooling at all of multiple hosts in the same cluster when 
>>>the clustertype is defined as externally managed?
>>>Evan Miller
>>>Citrix Systems. Inc.
>>>Desktop and Cloud Engineering Infrastructure
>>>4988 Great America Parkway
>>>Santa Clara, CA 95054

View raw message