[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: gear creation on nodes




----- Original Message -----
> From: "meghdoot bhattacharya" <meghdoot_b yahoo com>
> To: "Mike McGrath" <mmcgrath redhat com>

> Let me know whether the workaround of creating unique gear profile
> names and districts with that will force it to be spread across
> nodes only in that district. I am expecting the algorithm to not
> look deeper that gear profile X and Y are created with same values
> but rather use only the profile type declared.

The broker is not using the values specified in the node's resource_limits.conf, except for the name. That goes into the node's facts and mcollective filters on it. There is no attempt to verify that node hosts with the same profile name actually have the same limits, or that different profile names have different limits. See https://openshift.redhat.com/community/wiki/deployment-guide-to-openshift-on-rhel-6#Gear_profiles_sizes

BTW Mike, server code up through the API calls them gear or node "profiles". We've called them gear "sizes" from the client perspective for the Online service but since they don't necessarily have anything to do with size, that seemed like a misnomer. Clayton and I batted around a few ideas internally but settled on staying with "profile" for consistency. That's how it's documented now at least on the server side. The client may head in other directions. I hope eventually the gear profile returns to being more about resource limits and we provide another mechanism for controlling gear placement, whether admins want to do it according to location, ownership, dev/qa/prod environment, security clearance, or whatever ("geo" seems like too limited a concept to cover this but I guess as long as you can designate a group of node hosts for a particular purpose, it gets the job done).


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]