Jay Pipes <jaypi...@gmail.com> wrote on 01/21/2014 08:50:36 PM:
> On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 14:28 +0000, Day, Phil wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I think there is clear water between this and the existing
> aggregate based
> > > isolation. I also think this is a different use case from
> reservations. It's
> > > *mostly* like a new scheduler hint, but because it has billing
> impacts I think it
> > > needs to be more than just that - for example the ability to request
> > > dedicated instance is something that should be controlled by a
> specific role.
Please help me see this clear water. At the icehouse summit I heard the
concern that without reservations there will be an unacceptably high
probability that a nova-boot request will be unsatisfiable due to lack of
hosts that are fully idle. Why is that not a concern now?
> > > IMHO, this model is interesting but hard to use for operators,
> because they
> > > don't have visibility on the capacity. ...
In what sense do operators not have visibility on the capacity?
> Yup, agreed. It's difficult to guess what the capacity implications
> would be without having solid numbers on customer demands for this
> functionality, including hard data on how long such instances would
> typically live (see my previous point about re-using compute hosts for
> other purposes once the last dedicated instance is terminated on that
That is what I find hardest about designing stuff for general purpose use
--- we get to assume little about the usage.
OpenStack-dev mailing list