Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack] [Nova] BP about usb-passthrough RE: Change in openstack/nova-specs[master]: Support specify USB controller for USB-passthrough
Hi Thanks for your reply. By now many people think USB-redirection is a valuable function, so I wrote a BP for it in https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/usb-redirection. I will write a detailed spec for it a little later, hope you can review it too. For use cases of USB-passthrough, we indeed have many requirements from customers in private cloud. I think Openstack may also been used for private cloud solution, so if we provide USB-passthrough as an optional function may also have some values. Welcome for any and more advices. Thanks -Original Message- From: Jay Pipes [mailto:jaypi...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 1:23 PM To: Yuanjing (D) Cc: Daniel Berrange; Joe Gordon; openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Subject: Re: [Openstack] [Nova] BP about usb-passthrough RE: Change in openstack/nova-specs[master]: Support specify USB controller for USB-passthrough On Wed, 2014-04-23 at 02:01 +, Yuanjing (D) wrote: Hi I have proposed three BPs about usb-passthrough. 1. Usb-passthrough is the core function I want to provide which is in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/86404/. 2. The function of specify usb controller for usb-passthrough is for refine the use of Usb-passthrough, which is in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88337/. 3. The function of specify usb controller is the prerequisite of specify usb controller for usb-passthrough which is in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88334. The backgrounds are: I want to make a detailed explanation about why I suggest to provide this function. We provide VDI(Virtual Desktop) and server virtualization solutions for customers, our customers have strong requirements for using USB devices. The typical use cases and our solutions are described as below: 1.In VDI solution, customers want to use local USB printers or USB scanners with TC(Thin-Client), because remote desktop protocol like ICA have already support USB-redirection, so customers only need to attach USB device to TC, the protocol can map USB device to VM. 2. In virtualization solution, when starting or restarting some business-critical applications, a connected USB-KEY is needed for authentication, some applications even need a daily authentication by USB-KEY. we suggest the following solutions: (1) Using physical 'USB-HUB' box and technology of USB-redirection over TCP/IP. Customers need to buy USB-HUB and install software in guest os, the software helps redirecting USB device to VM. (2) Using USB-Passthrough and USB hot-plug functions provided by our virtualization software. The end users(normally application or system administrators) insert USB devices to host that containing the VM, then can see USB device list in portal and choose USB device to attach. This solution has advantages that 1. It doesn't need additional physical devices 2. It doesn't need a special server to run spice client for USB-Redirection 3. Business-critical applications commonly need stable and long-standing USB-KEY to attach, USB-Passthrough maybe more stable than USB-Redirection over TCP/IP or remote desktop protocol. Hi Jing, thx for your above email. I think of cloud computing as providing a way for users to *not* have to manage hardware -- they are free to work with virtual servers and then throw them away when not needed or get a new one quickly if something bad happens. I'm afraid I don't see any relation to what I think of as cloud in the second use case you list above. I don't think having a system administrator running around to a physical machine in a datacenter and plugging in a USB key is a cloudy activity. For the first use case, however, where the user inserts a USB device on the thin client and USB redirection allows the VM to read/write to the USB device on the thin client, I certainly see a good use case there. However, I am uncertain which of your blueprints deals exclusively with the first use case. Could you advise on that? Best, -jay ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [Openstack] [Nova] BP about usb-passthrough RE: Change in openstack/nova-specs[master]: Support specify USB controller for USB-passthrough
Hi I have proposed three BPs about usb-passthrough. 1. Usb-passthrough is the core function I want to provide which is in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/86404/. 2. The function of specify usb controller for usb-passthrough is for refine the use of Usb-passthrough, which is in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88337/. 3. The function of specify usb controller is the prerequisite of specify usb controller for usb-passthrough which is in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88334. The backgrounds are: I want to make a detailed explanation about why I suggest to provide this function. We provide VDI(Virtual Desktop) and server virtualization solutions for customers, our customers have strong requirements for using USB devices. The typical use cases and our solutions are described as below: 1.In VDI solution, customers want to use local USB printers or USB scanners with TC(Thin-Client), because remote desktop protocol like ICA have already support USB-redirection, so customers only need to attach USB device to TC, the protocol can map USB device to VM. 2. In virtualization solution, when starting or restarting some business-critical applications, a connected USB-KEY is needed for authentication, some applications even need a daily authentication by USB-KEY. we suggest the following solutions: (1) Using physical 'USB-HUB' box and technology of USB-redirection over TCP/IP. Customers need to buy USB-HUB and install software in guest os, the software helps redirecting USB device to VM. (2) Using USB-Passthrough and USB hot-plug functions provided by our virtualization software. The end users(normally application or system administrators) insert USB devices to host that containing the VM, then can see USB device list in portal and choose USB device to attach. This solution has advantages that 1. It doesn't need additional physical devices 2. It doesn't need a special server to run spice client for USB-Redirection 3. Business-critical applications commonly need stable and long-standing USB-KEY to attach, USB-Passthrough maybe more stable than USB-Redirection over TCP/IP or remote desktop protocol. Welcome for any advices. Thanks -Original Message- From: Jay Pipes (Code Review) [mailto:rev...@openstack.org] Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 6:59 AM To: Yuanjing (D) Cc: Daniel Berrange; Joe Gordon Subject: Change in openstack/nova-specs[master]: Support specify USB controller for USB-passthrough Jay Pipes has posted comments on this change. Change subject: Support specify USB controller for USB-passthrough .. Patch Set 1: I would prefer that you didn't merge this Jing, what is the difference between this blueprint and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88334/? Are they the same? -- To view, visit https://review.openstack.org/88337 To unsubscribe, visit https://review.openstack.org/settings Gerrit-MessageType: comment Gerrit-Change-Id: I26c81c61754af883b8de4c1ffe58384b87b22a77 Gerrit-PatchSet: 1 Gerrit-Project: openstack/nova-specs Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Owner: Jing Yuan yj.y...@huawei.com Gerrit-Reviewer: Daniel Berrange berra...@redhat.com Gerrit-Reviewer: Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Gerrit-Reviewer: Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [Openstack] [Nova] BP about usb-passthrough RE: Change in openstack/nova-specs[master]: Support specify USB controller for USB-passthrough
Hi I have proposed three BPs about usb-passthrough. 1. Usb-passthrough is the core function I want to provide which is in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/86118/. 2. The function of specify usb controller for usb-passthrough is for refine the use of Usb-passthrough, which is in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88337/. 3. The function of specify usb controller is the prerequisite of specify usb controller for usb-passthrough which is in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88334. The backgrounds are: I want to make a detailed explanation about why I suggest to provide this function. We provide VDI(Virtual Desktop) and server virtualization solutions for customers, our customers have strong requirements for using USB devices. The typical use cases and our solutions are described as below: 1.In VDI solution, customers want to use local USB printers or USB scanners with TC(Thin-Client), because remote desktop protocol like ICA have already support USB-redirection, so customers only need to attach USB device to TC, the protocol can map USB device to VM. 2. In virtualization solution, when starting or restarting some business-critical applications, a connected USB-KEY is needed for authentication, some applications even need a daily authentication by USB-KEY. we suggest the following solutions: (1) Using physical 'USB-HUB' box and technology of USB-redirection over TCP/IP. Customers need to buy USB-HUB and install software in guest os, the software helps redirecting USB device to VM. (2) Using USB-Passthrough and USB hot-plug functions provided by our virtualization software. The end users(normally application or system administrators) insert USB devices to host that containing the VM, then can see USB device list in portal and choose USB device to attach. This solution has advantages that 1. It doesn't need additional physical devices 2. It doesn't need a special server to run spice client for USB-Redirection 3. Business-critical applications commonly need stable and long-standing USB-KEY to attach, USB-Passthrough maybe more stable than USB-Redirection over TCP/IP or remote desktop protocol. Welcome for any advices. Thanks -Original Message- From: Jay Pipes (Code Review) [mailto:rev...@openstack.org] Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 6:59 AM To: Yuanjing (D) Cc: Daniel Berrange; Joe Gordon Subject: Change in openstack/nova-specs[master]: Support specify USB controller for USB-passthrough Jay Pipes has posted comments on this change. Change subject: Support specify USB controller for USB-passthrough .. Patch Set 1: I would prefer that you didn't merge this Jing, what is the difference between this blueprint and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88334/? Are they the same? -- To view, visit https://review.openstack.org/88337 To unsubscribe, visit https://review.openstack.org/settings Gerrit-MessageType: comment Gerrit-Change-Id: I26c81c61754af883b8de4c1ffe58384b87b22a77 Gerrit-PatchSet: 1 Gerrit-Project: openstack/nova-specs Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Owner: Jing Yuan yj.y...@huawei.com Gerrit-Reviewer: Daniel Berrange berra...@redhat.com Gerrit-Reviewer: Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Gerrit-Reviewer: Joe Gordon joe.gord...@gmail.com ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
[openstack-dev] [ceilometer] Serveral questions about alarm function of ceilometer
Hi I have a requirement of monitoring VMs, if a VM's meter like cpu_util become too high, then system generate an alarm for this VM with meter information. I have tested alarm function of ceilometer, below are commands I used to create alarm object with meter and resource id or not: ceilometer alarm-threshold-create --name alarm1 --meter-name cpu_util --period 60 --evaluation-periods 1 --statistic avg --comparison-operator gt --threshold 1 -q resource_id=757dadaa-0707-4fad-808d-81edc11438aa ceilometer alarm-threshold-create --name alarm1 --meter-name cpu_util --period 60 --evaluation-periods 1 --statistic avg --comparison-operator gt --threshold 1 I have the following question: If I have to define alarm object for every VM and every meter? Take 100 VM and 2 meter cpu_util, memory_util as an example, I will have to define 100*2 alarm objects for them. I think if I just define alarm object with meter not but VM(resource_id), then alarm evaluator will count all VM's meter. Another question produced by question above: I know that alarm evaluator will process alarm object one by one, so too many alarm object may result in performance problems too. I am not a ceilometer programmer and I apologize if I am missing something very obvious. Can you give me some help to make me clear about them and how to implement my requirement? Thanks ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
