incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Prachi Damle <>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules
Date Fri, 04 Jan 2013 23:50:48 GMT
Yes, requirements seem vague. What parameters define affinity/anti-affinity?

Requirements mention
>>  For each VM, users should be able to provide both (Affinity VMs and Anti-affinity
VMs) lists concurrently. For example, VM-A can have affinity with VMs B & C and anti-affinity
with VMs D & E at the same time.
>> When configuring Affinity / anti-affinity for a VM, users should be allowed to provide
a list of affinity / anti-affinity VMs (via API) or select affinity /anti-affinity VMs from
a list (via UI)

When user specifies VM-A can have affinity with VMs B & C does that mean they should be
placed on same pod or same hypervisor(cluster or host) by the allocation logic?

-----Original Message-----
From: Chiradeep Vittal [] 
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 6:06 PM
To: CloudStack DeveloperList
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Affinity / Anti-affinity Rules

Actually the proposal is quite vague.
What does affinity mean to the end-user?
What guarantees are being asked for?
 - the vms are on the same hypervisor (affinity)
 - the vms are not on the same hypervisor (anti)
 - the vms are interconnected by a high-speed interconnect (affinity)
 - the vms are in different failure domains (host/cluster/pod)

I find the concept of affinity groups useful.
A possible workflow would be
1. Create an affinity group of type 'Foo'
1a. Group type indicates the guarantee
2. Create a VM in the group

VMs can only leave groups on vm destruction.

But without the specific type of guarantee, it is hard to discuss this proposal.

On 1/3/13 4:23 PM, "Manan Shah" <> wrote:

>I would like to propose a new feature for enabling Affinity / 
>Anti-affinity rules in CS 4.1. I have created a JIRA ticket and 
>provided the requirements at the following location.  Please provide 
>feedback on the requirements.
>JIRA Ticket:
>Manan Shah

View raw message