(Re-opening an old thread) On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 9:53 AM, Yedidyah Bar David <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 9:45 AM, Dan Kenigsberg <[email protected]> wrote: >> 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? > > I believe these are irrelevant if the user opts to not configure/run > OVN on the engine machine. My (not sure about Yaniv's) question was only > about disk space, which iiuc is the only implication of making engine > Require: ovn. Still, if possible, it will be useful if someone can > provide cpu/memory use, and also the list of dependencies for the ovn > package (and the provider package) - especially if there are ones that > are not from the base OS.
Any update? I still think that we should either make the engine Require: ovn or change the default to 'No'. -- Didi _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
