Open Stack

We have had similar debates for the host passthrough and disk cache
options in Nova which are set in nova.conf. We find that the application
launcher should determine this (may be subject to an administrator
override).

Options like guest agent seem reasonable to be on the image (since they
need code).

Tim

On 4/30/15, 3:21 AM, "Blair Bethwaite" <blair.bethwaite at gmail.com> wrote:

>Thanks Daniel,
>
>I'll fix that, need to try my hand at doc patches.
>
>Whilst I've got your attention, any comment on my aside about it
>seeming odd from userland perspective that these (and similar
>tunables) are controlled through flavor/image extra specs?
>"Does anyone else find it strange that all these options are designed
>to be flavor and/or image extra specs rather than providing a
>mechanism to set them on instance boot (e.g. hints). I think the
>relationship between flavors or images and such tunables is tenuous at
>best, why should I need multiple versions of what is otherwise the
>same image or flavor in order to ask for e.g. CPU pinning or Qemu
>Guest Agent, these are per instance tunables/variables."
>
>Cheers,
>
>On 30 April 2015 at 01:31, Daniel P. Berrange <berrange at redhat.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 11:12:54AM -0400, Steve Gordon wrote:
>>> Adding Dan and Nikola as I doubt they are on this list, guys this is
>>>in reference to this devref example which looks a little off:
>>>
>>> 
>>>http://docs.openstack.org/developer/nova/devref/testing/libvirt-numa.htm
>>>l#testing-instance-boot-with-1-numa-cell-requested
>>
>> Yes, sorry my bad. That XML example is wrong - it is the XML you'd see
>> from a hw:numa_nodes=2 config, not hw:numa_nodes=1
>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> > From: "Blair Bethwaite" <blair.bethwaite at gmail.com>
>>> > To: "Pradeep Kiruvale" <pradeepkiruvale at gmail.com>
>>> > Cc: openstack-hpc at lists.openstack.org
>>> > Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 10:33:31 AM
>>> > Subject: Re: [openstack-hpc] NUMA config
>>> >
>>> > On 29 April 2015 at 18:50, Pradeep Kiruvale
>>><pradeepkiruvale at gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > > I think it creates 2 Virtual NUMA nodes on one single Physical
>>>NUMA node
>>> > > If you see below cpu 0-1 are in one NUMA node and 2-3 are in the
>>>other.
>>> > > This is what I can understand from the xml.
>>> > >
>>> > >  <numa>
>>> > >    <cell id='0' cpus='0-1' memory='524288'/>
>>> > >    <cell id='1' cpus='2-3' memory='524288'/>
>>> > >  </numa>
>>> >
>>> > Yeah, but that doesn't seem to be consistent with this from the same
>>>section:
>>> > "nova flavor-key m1.numa set hw:numa_nodes=1"
>>> > According to the spec
>>> > 
>>>(http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/nova-specs/specs/juno/implemented/
>>>virt-driver-numa-placement.html):
>>> > hw:numa_nodes=NN - numa of NUMA nodes to expose to the guest.
>>> > Not to mention the numatune config that binds the guest nodes to
>>>host nodes.
>>> >
>>> > An aside: Does anyone else find it strange that all these options are
>>> > designed to be flavor and/or image extra specs rather than providing
>>>a
>>> > mechanism to set them on instance boot (e.g. hints). I think the
>>> > relationship between flavors or images and such tunables is tenuous
>>>at
>>> > best, why should I need multiple versions of what is otherwise the
>>> > same image or flavor in order to ask for e.g. CPU pinning or Qemu
>>> > guest agent, these are per instance tunables.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Daniel
>> --
>> |: http://berrange.com      -o-
>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :|
>> |: http://libvirt.org              -o-
>>http://virt-manager.org :|
>> |: http://autobuild.org       -o-
>>http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :|
>> |: http://entangle-photo.org       -o-
>>http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :|
>
>
>
>-- 
>Cheers,
>~Blairo
>
>_______________________________________________
>OpenStack-HPC mailing list
>OpenStack-HPC at lists.openstack.org
>http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-hpc