[openstack-dev] [nova] Configure overcommit policy
GLIKSON at il.ibm.com
Thu Nov 14 15:13:14 UTC 2013
In fact, there is a blueprint which would enable supporting this scenario
without partitioning --
The idea is to annotate flavors with CPU allocation guarantees, and enable
differentiation between instances, potentially running on the same host.
The implementation is augmenting the CoreFilter code to factor in the
differentiation. Hopefully this will be out for review soon.
From: John Garbutt <john at johngarbutt.com>
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)"
<openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>,
Date: 14/11/2013 04:57 PM
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Configure overcommit policy
On 13 November 2013 14:51, Khanh-Toan Tran
<khanh-toan.tran at cloudwatt.com> wrote:
> Well, I don't know what John means by "modify the over-commit
> the scheduler", so I cannot comment.
I was talking about this code:
But I am not sure thats what you want.
> The idea of choosing free host for Hadoop on the fly is rather
> and contains several operations, namely: (1) assuring the host never get
> pass 100% CPU load; (2) identifying a host that already has a Hadoop VM
> running on it, or already 100% CPU commitment; (3) releasing the host
> 100% CPU commitment once the Hadoop VM stops; (4) possibly avoiding
> applications to use the host (to economy the host resource).
> - You'll need (1) because otherwise your Hadoop VM would come short of
> resources after the host gets overloaded.
> - You'll need (2) because you don't want to restrict a new host while
> your 100% CPU commited hosts still has free resources.
> - You'll need (3) because otherwise you host would be forerever
> and that is no longer "on the fly".
> - You'll may need (4) because otherwise it'd be a waste of resources.
> The problem of changing CPU overcommit on the fly is that when your
> VM is still running, someone else can add another VM in the same host
> higher CPU overcommit (e.g. 200%), (violating (1) ) thus effecting your
> Hadoop VM also.
> The idea of putting the host in the aggregate can give you (1) and (2).
> is done by AggregateInstanceExtraSpecsFilter. However, it does not give
> (3); which can be done with pCloud.
Step 1: use flavors so nova can tell between the two workloads, and
configure them differently
Step 2: find capacity for your workload given your current cloud usage
At the moment, most of our solutions involve reserving bits of your
cloud capacity for different workloads, generally using host
The issue with claiming back capacity from other workloads is a bit
tricker. The issue is I don't think you have defined where you get
that capacity back from? Maybe you want to look at giving some
workloads a higher priority over the constrained CPU resources? But
you will probably starve the little people out at random, which seems
bad. Maybe you want to have a concept of "spot instances" where they
can use your "spare capacity" until you need it, and you can just kill
But maybe I am miss understanding your use case, its not totally clear to
OpenStack-dev mailing list
OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the OpenStack-dev