Open Stack

Hi Matt,

I would suggest to let users specify custom topology in Shaker scenario via
graphs (e.g. directed triangle would look like: A -> B, B -> C, C -> A),
where every pair of nodes is pair of VMs and every edge corresponds to the
traffic flow. The above example will be deployed as 6 VMs, 2 per compute
node (since we need to separate ingress and egress flows).

I already have a patch that allows to deploy graph-based topology:
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/407495/ but it does not configure
concurrency properly yet (concurrency still increments by pairs, solution
tbd)

Please check whether my approach suits your use case, feedback appreciated
:)

Thanks,
Ilya

2016-11-24 19:57 GMT+04:00 Matthieu Simonin <matthieu.simonin at inria.fr>:

> Hi Ilya,
>
> Thanks for your answer, let me know your findings.
> In any case I'll be glad to help if needed.
>
> Matt
>
> ps : I just realized that I missed a proper subjet to the thread :(.
> If this thread continue it's maybe better to change that.
>
> ----- Mail original -----
> > De: "Ilya Shakhat" <ishakhat at mirantis.com>
> > À: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <
> openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
> > Envoyé: Jeudi 24 Novembre 2016 13:03:33
> > Objet: Re: [openstack-dev] [Performance][shaker]
> >
> > Hi Matt,
> >
> > Out of the box Shaker doesn't support such topology.
> > It shouldn't be hard to implement though. Let me check what needs to be
> > done.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ilya
> >
> > 2016-11-24 13:49 GMT+03:00 Matthieu Simonin <matthieu.simonin at inria.fr>:
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I'm looking to shaker capabilities and I'm wondering if this kind
> > > of accomodation (see attachment also) can be achieved
> > >
> > > Ascii (flat) version :
> > >
> > > CN1 (2n VMs) <- n flows -> CN2 (2n VMs)
> > > CN1 (2n VMs) <- n flows -> CN3 (2n VMs)
> > > CN2 (2n VMs) <- n flows -> CN3 (2n VMs)
> > >
> > > In this situation concurrency could be mapped to the number of
> > > simultaneous flows in use per link.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Matt
> > >
> > >
> > > ____________________________________________________________
> ______________
> > > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > > Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:
> unsubscribe
> > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> ______________
> > OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> > Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:
> unsubscribe
> > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> >
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20161206/bf60ee55/attachment.html>