On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Yaniv Kaul <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Dan Kenigsberg <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Martin Perina <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Will OVN provider be mandatory for all engine 4.2 installation? Can OVN >> > provider be installed on different host than engine? If not mandatory or >> > "may be on different host", then it should be handled similar way as >> > DWH, so >> > it should be in separate package and it's engine-setup part should also >> > be >> > in separate package. >> >> In 4.2, OVN provider is configured by default on the Engine host, but >> the user can opt to avoid that. He can then configure the provider >> manually, and add it manually to Engine. We have already limited the >> automatic configuration of OVN to the case of it running on the same >> host. >> >> When looked from this perspective, adding an explicit rpm-level >> Requires, does not make things much worse, it only makes reality >> visible. >> >> > And even if we don't support OVN on different host in >> > 4.2, we can prepare for the future ... >> >> A big question is whether that future includes installing things on a >> remote host (as in DWH), or alternatively spawning a container. >> Implementing the OVN deployment to the Engine machine took quite a big >> effort[1]. I worry that extending it to allow remote host would be >> even more consuming, it's not a minor preparation but a mid-size >> feature on its own. > > > I'm not sure anyone answered how heavy (CPU, memory, disk size) it is on the > Engine.
On another thread, Sandro mentioned the effect on disk size: +17Mb, +2%. CPU and Memory are much harder to estimate, as they depend on the number of networks and hosts controlled by OVN. Mor, can you provide numbers for a small cluster that you tested? Dan. _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
