Hi Koushik: Thanks for the reply - a few followup comments inline. I look forward to seeing this work.
Other folks: please read the entire thread and the links from Koushik; there's a planned deprecation here. --David On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 2:38 AM, Koushik Das <koushik....@citrix.com> wrote: > Thanks for the comments David. See inline. > > -Koushik > > On 22-Nov-2013, at 7:31 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote: > >> Hi Koushik: >> >> In general I like the idea. A couple of comments: >> >> The upgrade section has a manual step for enabling HA manually per >> instance. Why a manual step? Why is CloudStack not checking the >> desired state (e.g. if HA is enabled in the instance service group) >> with the actual state (what is reflected on the hypervisor) and >> changing it when appropriate. >> >> We are already going to need to reconcile the state (things like host >> the instance is running on will change for instance) with reality >> already - so it seems like making this an automatic step wouldn't be >> much extra effort and would scale far easier. > > [Koushik] Are you suggesting that as part of the upgrade process, all > impacted VMs should be automatically updated? If so, yes it can be done. For > now I am keeping it manual, in future the process can be automated. > Why keeping it manual now? Actually let me rephrase - I can understand why someone might not want things changed automagically (as an admin I'd want nothing changed by default, but changed if I cared about it in some automated fashion) Is there a reason we would not include some functionality to let the operator automatically change this on some subset or all of the machines in an automated fashion? >> >> Are there plans on deprecating the custom HA solution, or will it be >> supported forever? If the plan is to deprecate, lets go ahead and >> start planning that/announcing/etc and not let it fall into disrepair. > > [Koushik] That's the plan going forward. For the next release both options > will be there. Maybe post that the custom HA solution can be removed for XS > 6.2 and above. > >> Please make sure that the deprecation is explicitly called out. E.g will be present but deprecated in 4.4 and removed in 4.5; and let's make sure a doc bug gets filed when this is ready for merge. --David
