Most of commands are executed in sequence at per-host scope, there will be
some concurrency when VMs are being deployed among different hosts.
However, for each individual orchestration flow, concurrency is usually
not in consideration in current code base.
Kelven
On 4/4/13 12:39 PM, "Jeronimo Garcia" <garciaj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Ok I'll rebuild and see the differences and wether we want to have this
>live or not .
>
>Thanks a lot for your help!
>
>
>On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Alena Prokharchyk <
>alena.prokharc...@citrix.com> wrote:
>
>> No, it can't be updated using UI/WebServices APIs.
>>
>> I remember somebody in the dev list mentioned that he modified
>> StartCommand.java with executeInSequence=false and tested it with KVM
>> hypervisor, and it worked for him. Not sure how concurrent starts (and
>>how
>> many) are supported by other hypervisors, so have to be careful if
>>decide
>> to set this flag to true.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/4/13 12:01 PM, "Jeronimo Garcia" <garciaj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Hi.
>> >
>> >I can see the override on *agent/api/StartCommand.java*
>> >*
>> >*
>> >*@Override*
>> >*public boolean executeInSequence() {*
>> >* return true;
>> > *
>> >*}*
>> >*
>> >*
>> >I'm guessing this can't be changed from the gui or api right?
>> >
>> >Thanks
>> >
>> >
>> >On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Jeronimo Garcia
>> ><garciaj...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> >
>> >> Thanks Alena, im checking that out now.
>> >> Chiradeep , I'm using the default centos template that comes with the
>> >> secondary storage sys vm.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Chiradeep Vittal <
>> >> chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Note that each deployment to local storage has to download the base
>> >>> template to local disk from secondary storage. How big is the
>>template?
>> >>> How fast is your secondary storage?
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 4/4/13 11:36 AM, "Jeronimo Garcia" <garciaj...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> >Hi List.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >I'm having issues when deploying a big number of virtual machines
>> >>>across
>> >>> a
>> >>> >number of nodes.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >the imporession that i get ( from the logs) is that the
>> >>>AsyncJobExecutor
>> >>> >is
>> >>> >pulling jobs from the queue and do them one by one (which when you
>>are
>> >>> >deploying a big number of virtual machines could take a long while)
>> >>> >
>> >>> >In AsyncJobManager.java i see something that could change this
>> >>>behaviour
>> >>> >but im not sure:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >*final int cloudMaxActive =
>> >>> >Integer.parseInt(dbProps.getProperty("db.cloud.maxActive"));
>> >>> > *
>> >>> >*int poolSize = (cloudMaxActive * 2) / 3;*
>> >>> >
>> >>> >.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >I'm using 'random' as vm.allocation.algorithm , and my rest is to
>> >>>deploy
>> >>> >200 vms across 7 nodes using local storage, also im using
>> >>> >cloud-server-4.0.1-1 version.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >I've tried playing with worker settings in agents and manager but i
>> >>>don't
>> >>> >see any change so far.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >Thanks!
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>>
