The prototype PR from Tyson was based on a fixed capacity of concurrent activations per container. From that, I presume once the limit is reached, the load balancer would roll over to allocate a new container.
-r > On Jul 6, 2017, at 6:09 AM, Michael M Behrendt <michaelbehre...@de.ibm.com> > wrote: > > Hi Michael, > > thx for checking. I wasn't referring to adding/removing VMs, but rather > activation contaIners. In today's model that is done intrinsically, while > I *think* in what Dragos described, the containers would have to be > monitored somehow so this new component can decide (based on > cpu/mem/io/etc load within the containers) when to add/remove containers. > > > Thanks & best regards > Michael
