Sorry, should have been more clear in my question. What's the math that got you to 8?
- chip Sent from my iPhone. On Dec 20, 2012, at 11:50 AM, Alex Huang <alex.hu...@citrix.com> wrote: > Kelven offered a reason earlier. > > "8-host limitation comes from the limitation posted from VMFSv3 for > linked-clone usage. So in CloudStack, it is an artificial limit we post to > reduce possible runtime problems." > > It's due to VMFSv3 and usage of linked clone in CloudStack. > > --Alex > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] >> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 8:46 AM >> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org >> Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Raise cluster size limit to 16 on VMware >> >> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 10:24 AM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 1:54 AM, Koushik Das <koushik....@citrix.com> >> wrote: >>>> This http://www.vmware.com/pdf/vsphere5/r51/vsphere-51- >> configuration-maximums.pdf mentions that the max. can be 32 for ESX 5.1. >> Any specific reason to make it 16? Also it needs to be seen that this limit >> works across all supported ESX versions. >>>> >>>> -Koushik >>> >>> Yes - the different versions having different limits complicates things a >>> bit. >>> 5.1 = 32, 5.0 = 16 4.x = 8? >>> >>> --David >> >> 4, 5 and 5.1 are all 32 hosts per cluster. Raw metrics, not using a >> more complex algo to calculate the more realistic cap. Just curious, >> but are there more specific reasons that we are talking about 4.x >> having a lower number? >> >> http://www.vmware.com/pdf/vsphere4/r40/vsp_40_config_max.pdf >> http://www.vmware.com/pdf/vsphere5/r50/vsphere-50-configuration- >> maximums.pdf >> http://www.vmware.com/pdf/vsphere5/r51/vsphere-51-configuration- >> maximums.pdf >> >> -chip >
