charles walker commented on LIBCLOUD-991:

I think first i need to spend some time understanding the logic because it 
seems I miss something. Talking with another DEV in my company about that he 
was surprise and told me it was already fix and send me a commit: 

I realize we were not talking about the same thing since it is a commit in 
Ansible but seems like to the same topic. After some more reading on the code 
it seems the 500 limitation is well know and in fact should maybe taken care on 
customer side (with pagination support) like Ansible done but i m still 
wondering if it would be nicer to have it directly integrated on libcloud...

Maybe with a new method using GCE_LIST 
 ? I still thinking about it and wondering if this Jira ticket is the best 
place to gather feedback on this topic 

> Can not retrieve more than 500VM on Google cloud
> ------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: LIBCLOUD-991
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LIBCLOUD-991
>             Project: Libcloud
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Compute
>         Environment: Google cloud project with more than 500VMs (python 3 and 
> last libcloud version AVL on pip)
>            Reporter: charles walker
>            Priority: Minor
> Today I notice that some of our VMs were not retrieve by our internal 
> toolings. After some investigation it seems that libcloud "list_nodes()" 
> method on google can only retrieve max 500VMs:
> [root@stackviewer-5cbcd8695-x964t /]# grep -o Vm response.log | wc -l
> 500
> when we have in reality around 750 VMs. So i had a quick look and my first 
> guess is that it comes from the call made by liblcoud using this REST API:
> [https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/reference/rest/v1/instances/aggregatedList]
> with an optional argument "maxResults" that has a default value of 500 (which 
> seems also to be the max value BTW). I think i m on the good lead due to this 
> 500 limit mentioned in the doc and also observe on my side.
> I will have a deeper look but just quickly open this ticket in case other 
> people already saw this limit

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

Reply via email to