Is there a way second computation can be avoided if "startvm" or some other flag to indicate starting the vm flag is passed?
On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 8:15 AM David Jumani <david.jum...@shapeblue.com> wrote: > Hi Rakesh, > > If I'm right, that's because a VM can be deployed without starting it. It > initially checks whether the VM can be deployed, and once again before > starting as things might change (if started some time after deployment) > I'm all for optimizing the code but this is the reason I see the > duplication of code / computation > > ________________________________ > From: Rakesh Venkatesh <www.rakeshv....@gmail.com> > Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2021 2:34 PM > To: users <us...@cloudstack.apache.org>; dev <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > Subject: Code executed twice while deploying VM > > Hello Users/Devs > > > Today I observed that while deploying a VM, the same code is executed > twice: the first time, while trying to find a suitable deployment > destination and the second time, while trying to start a VM. I think this > is a redundant process and also time-consuming since the same calculations > are done twice. These are the one of the duplicate logs > > Asyn job is created > 2021-07-28 09:01:27,964 (logid:10ac9f28) ZoneWideStoragePoolAllocator to > find storage pool > > Now it finds a suitable destination > Returning Deployment Destination: > > Dest[Zone(Id)-Pod(Id)-Cluster(Id)-Host(Id)-Storage(Volume(Id|Type-->Pool(Id))] > : Dest[Zone(1)-Pod(1)-Cluster(1)-Host(1)-Storage(Volume(23|ROOT-->Pool(3))] > > VM start attempt #1 > > 2021-07-28 09:01:36,039 job-174/job-175 ctx-b815930d) (logid:10ac9f28) > ZoneWideStoragePoolAllocator to find storage pool > > > From the above two logs, I can see that starting at 9:01:27 and 09:01:36, > its doing the same calculations. > if I see the logs before and after the above-mentioned logs, they are all > same. They try to find a suitable host, a suitable storage pool, and so on. > In the production platform, the calculation is done twice and this takes a > lot of time to deploy a VM. > > Do you guys also think this is an issue or redundant process and needs to > be improved? Or any other suggestions to avoid double calculation? > > -- > Thanks and regards > Rakesh > > > > -- Thanks and regards Rakesh venkatesh
