Hi Shaheed, We are sorry to hear the problems that you have encountered while trying to use the latest codebase. Yes I agree that there are bits and pieces missing in the documentation at the moment.
Shall we have a quick call to get things sorted? Anyone interested can also join. Thanks On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Lahiru Sandaruwan <lahi...@wso2.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry for the typos. Agreed with Shaheed on Max values. We only have one > place to define minimum already, which is cartridge min. We can move that > as partitionMin and find the Cartridge min using them. > > Thanks. > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 2:37 PM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam <rajkum...@wso2.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I agree with Shaheed. cartridgeMax is the addition of all partitions' >> partiionMax values and cartridgeMin is the addition of all partition's >> partitioinMin values in the deployment policy that the cartridge is >> referring to. >> >> As Lakmal mentioned, we can calculate cartridgeMax/Min using >> partitionMax/Min in deployment policy. >> >> Thanks. >> >> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 2:22 PM, Lakmal Warusawithana <lak...@wso2.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I think, we only need two values min/max. Min is need to get dependency >>> ratio (and HA) and max is need for one-after-other deployment patten or >>> absolute max. IMO, if we can set all these values in deployment policy >>> (with respect to partitions) would be very clear. >>> >>> Only reason I can see, put CartridgeMin in application is to calculate >>> dependency ratio. Can we calculate it from attached deployment policy? >>> >>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 1:50 PM, Shaheedur Haque (shahhaqu) < >>> shahh...@cisco.com> wrote: >>> >>>> LOL. We are going around in circles…let’s start over. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> In 4.1.0, there are two pairs of limits on instance numbers, one called >>>> partitionMin/Max (specified in the Deployment Policy) and one called >>>> cartridgeMin/Max alongside the subscription info (specified in the >>>> Application). >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> My question was what is the point of cartridgeMax? You gave a very >>>> confusing example in reply with what look like several crucial typos, and >>>> even if I guess at what was intended, I still don’t see a strong reason to >>>> have cartridgeMax. Specifically, in your example, if I wanted to limit the >>>> application to 5 instances of PHP, why would I not simply set the >>>> partitionMax to 2,3 or 3,2 in the two partitions? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Similarly, I have yet to see any convincing response as to why >>>> cartridgeMin is really required. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The subtle shift in behavior being claimed in these cases seems >>>> confusing at best, and simply broken at worst. I claim broken because there >>>> are no clear rules as to how all 4 values relate, and no clear use-case to >>>> have all 4. In short, I have no idea how or why I should set them. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Please clarify or remove. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, Shaheed >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Lahiru Sandaruwan [mailto:lahi...@wso2.com] >>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, March 17, 2015 3:43 AM >>>> >>>> *To:* dev >>>> *Subject:* Re: [Discuss] Cartridge definition doesn't need >>>> "maxInstanceLimit" property anymore >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Shaheed, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> We can define the maximum number of instances that can be spawned per >>>> partition in deployment policy. You can find a simple sample which is >>>> written for next developer preview at [1]. This sample is an end to end >>>> sample with single cartridge application and Mock IaaS. See the step 5 for >>>> *partitionMax >>>> *usage. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/STRATOS/4.1.0-Beta+Install+Stratos+with+a+Mock+IaaS >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Shaheedur Haque (shahhaqu) < >>>> shahh...@cisco.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Lahiru, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> What do you mean by partition max? Where is it specified? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, Shaheed >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Lahiru Sandaruwan [mailto:lahi...@wso2.com] >>>> *Sent:* Saturday, March 14, 2015 2:31 AM >>>> >>>> >>>> *To:* dev >>>> *Subject:* Re: [Discuss] Cartridge definition doesn't need >>>> "maxInstanceLimit" property anymore >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Shaheedur, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This is the same model we had from 4.0.0 and we did not change the >>>> concept in this release. Explanation as below, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> There can be several partitions that a particular cartridge(service >>>> cluster) can span over. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> E.g. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Say PHP cartridge have 3 partitions(P1 and P2). P1 has 3 as partition >>>> max and P1 has 6 as partition max. >>>> >>>> PHP has 2 as Cartridge min and 5 as Cartridge max. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *With one-after-another algorithm between partitions,* >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Min instances creation,* >>>> >>>> Both the minimum instances will be created in P1. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Scaling up,* >>>> >>>> First scaling up member will be created in P1 and the next members will >>>> be created in P2. It can only create 3 members in P1 and 2 members in P2 as >>>> it will reach it's max of 5 members. That's where the cartridge max is >>>> used. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> * With round-robin algorithm between partitions,* >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Min instances creation,* >>>> >>>> One of the minimum instances will be created in P1 and the other in P2. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Scaling up,* >>>> >>>> Scaling up members will be created in round-robin manner in P1 and P2. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Shaheedur Haque (shahhaqu) < >>>> shahh...@cisco.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> After discussing a bit with Imesh, we identified 3 points that need >>>> clarifying: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> · If there is to be a cartridgeMin attribute, it should at >>>> least be optional and take its default value from the deployment policy >>>> minimum value. >>>> >>>> Do you mean the minimum value per partition? I cannot see such value. >>>> There is only maximum in partitions of deployment policy. >>>> >>>> · If there is to be a cartridgeMin attribute, its behaviour >>>> needs to be specified with respect to the deployment min and max. For >>>> example, what happens if the cartridgeMin is greater than the deployment >>>> max? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This is a good question. Ideally, with current implementation, it will >>>> not create instances beyond partition Max. >>>> >>>> · We need to find out what, if anything, the cartridgeMax is >>>> for. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> IMO partition max are for limiting the instances in IaaS, for >>>> particular region, zone or so. But cartridge need it's own limit when it >>>> scales up, where reusable partitions may have less or more space. Therefore >>>> we need both. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Stratos will create instances until the lowest of those max >>>> values(Cartridge max and partition max).* >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Shaheedur Haque (shahhaqu) >>>> *Sent:* 13 March 2015 08:22 >>>> *To:* dev@stratos.apache.org >>>> *Subject:* RE: [Discuss] Cartridge definition doesn't need >>>> "maxInstanceLimit" property anymore >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Reka, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> First, I strongly suggest we not use internal terms like “cluster”, >>>> since they are not part of the user visible model, to explain user visible >>>> behaviour. For example, my understanding of a cluster is almost certainly >>>> not as good as you think it is J. Nevertheless… >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I think I understand: you are saying that when a group scales up, you >>>> will initially spin up cartridgeMin instances, correct? If this is not >>>> correct, please clarify. If it is correct, then: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> · I would have thought that the correct behaviour was to >>>> enforce the minimum value specified in the deployment policy. >>>> >>>> · Even if there is a theoretical use case where a new group >>>> should start with a different values that the one in the deployment policy, >>>> you would need to clearly explain how cartridgeMin relates to both >>>> deployment min **and** max when the values clash. I say we should >>>> rather keep it simple and use the deployment policy values. >>>> >>>> · What is cartridgeMax used for? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, Shaheed >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Reka Thirunavukkarasu [mailto:r...@wso2.com <r...@wso2.com>] >>>> *Sent:* 13 March 2015 02:54 >>>> *To:* dev >>>> *Subject:* Re: [Discuss] Cartridge definition doesn't need >>>> "maxInstanceLimit" property anymore >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Shaheedur, >>>> >>>> Sorry for the confusion..Let me explain what cartridgeMin is and the >>>> purpose of having it in the application. As you already aware, we have >>>> the group instances/cluster instances concept with 4.1.0 in order to >>>> support group scaling. For the cluster level, we will need a minimum count >>>> for the members in order to maintain this minimum count all the time. Since >>>> we have cluster instance concept, we will need a minimum members per >>>> cluster instance level. So that whenever a new cluster instance is getting >>>> created, we can satisfy the cluster instance by creating the cartridgeMin >>>> number of members and can send the clusterInstanceActivated event. That's >>>> why >>>> cartridgeMin got introduced in the application. "cartridgeMin" means >>>> the minimum number of members per cluster instance. >>>> >>>> When a cluster instance is getting created, let's say you have two as >>>> the >>>> cartridgeMin. In that case in order to create those two members, we >>>> will need to find out the partition. For that, we will get the associated >>>> policy and find the suitable partition to spin those members one by one. If >>>> one of the partition is full, our algorithm is capable of choosing the next >>>> available partition. >>>> >>>> Please let me know, if it is unclear still.. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Reka >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Shaheedur Haque (shahhaqu) < >>>> shahh...@cisco.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> I’m now thoroughly confused as to what is going and staying. I **think** >>>> the latest part of this thread says we need to keep cartridgeMin and >>>> cartridgeMax. Why do we need cartridgeMin and cartridgeMax at this point in >>>> the system? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Reka Thirunavukkarasu [mailto:r...@wso2.com] >>>> *Sent:* 12 March 2015 17:09 >>>> *To:* dev >>>> *Subject:* Re: [Discuss] Cartridge definition doesn't need >>>> "maxInstanceLimit" property anymore >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Raj, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam < >>>> rajkum...@wso2.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 10:24 PM, Reka Thirunavukkarasu <r...@wso2.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Lahiru/Raj, >>>> >>>> I think that we have introduced this *cartridgeMin/cartridgeMax *when >>>> introducing the deployment policy for cartridge and groups as global >>>> deployment policy. Since we have the same concept now, i would like to >>>> review the implementation and confirm whether it is required or not. Can >>>> you please hold until that? I will quickly confirm on this.. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Hi Reka, I am not sure whether I understood you wrong. Yes we need >>>> cartridgeMin and cartridgeMax, which are defined in application json. But >>>> we don't need *maxInstanceLimit* property, which used to define in >>>> cartridge json in 4.0.0. I guess we have already removed references to this >>>> property from code base, but not from sample artifacts. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks for the details.. We no longer using *maxInstanceLimit. *+1 to >>>> remove it..I was bit confused when i read the mail body as i thought that >>>> you are going to remove cartidgeMin/cartridgeMax. Now it is clear.. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Reka >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Reka >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Lahiru Sandaruwan <lahi...@wso2.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Noticed today. It was misleading as we have this left in samples. I >>>> will clean this up. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 10:04 PM, Rajkumar Rajaratnam < >>>> rajkum...@wso2.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Devs, >>>> >>>> We are defining cartridge min max count in application definition. >>>> >>>> { >>>> "applicationId": "single-cartridge-app", >>>> "alias": "single-cartridge-app", >>>> "multiTenant": false, >>>> "components": { >>>> "cartridges": [ >>>> { >>>> "type": "php", >>>> >>>> *"cartridgeMin": 1, "cartridgeMax": 10,* >>>> "subscribableInfo": { >>>> "alias": "my-php", >>>> "autoscalingPolicy": "autoscaling-policy-1", >>>> "deploymentPolicy": "deployment-policy-1", >>>> "artifactRepository": { >>>> "privateRepo": false, >>>> "repoUrl": " >>>> https://github.com/imesh/stratos-php-applications.git";, >>>> "repoUsername": "", >>>> "repoPassword": "" >>>> } >>>> } >>>> } >>>> ] >>>> } >>>> } >>>> >>>> In 4.0.0, we used to define these in cartridge definition, in IaaS >>>> provider section. We have now removed it from cartridge bean classes. >>>> However I can see that samples still have this attribute. I will remove it. >>>> >>>> Thanks. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam >>>> >>>> Committer & PMC Member, Apache Stratos >>>> >>>> Software Engineer, WSO2 >>>> >>>> Mobile : +94777568639 >>>> >>>> Blog : rajkumarr.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Lahiru Sandaruwan >>>> >>>> Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos, >>>> Senior Software Engineer, >>>> WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com >>>> >>>> lean.enterprise.middleware >>>> >>>> phone: +94773325954 >>>> email: lahi...@wso2.com blog: http://lahiruwrites.blogspot.com/ >>>> linked-in: http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/lahiru-sandaruwan/16/153/146 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Reka Thirunavukkarasu >>>> Senior Software Engineer, >>>> WSO2, Inc.:http://wso2.com, >>>> >>>> Mobile: +94776442007 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Rajkumar Rajaratnam >>>> >>>> Committer & PMC Member, Apache Stratos >>>> >>>> Software Engineer, WSO2 >>>> >>>> Mobile : +94777568639 >>>> >>>> Blog : rajkumarr.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Reka Thirunavukkarasu >>>> Senior Software Engineer, >>>> WSO2, Inc.:http://wso2.com, >>>> >>>> Mobile: +94776442007 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Reka Thirunavukkarasu >>>> Senior Software Engineer, >>>> WSO2, Inc.:http://wso2.com, >>>> >>>> Mobile: +94776442007 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Lahiru Sandaruwan >>>> >>>> Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos, >>>> Senior Software Engineer, >>>> WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com >>>> >>>> lean.enterprise.middleware >>>> >>>> phone: +94773325954 >>>> email: lahi...@wso2.com blog: http://lahiruwrites.blogspot.com/ >>>> linked-in: http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/lahiru-sandaruwan/16/153/146 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Lahiru Sandaruwan >>>> >>>> Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos, >>>> Senior Software Engineer, >>>> WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com >>>> >>>> lean.enterprise.middleware >>>> >>>> phone: +94773325954 >>>> email: lahi...@wso2.com blog: http://lahiruwrites.blogspot.com/ >>>> linked-in: http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/lahiru-sandaruwan/16/153/146 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Lakmal Warusawithana >>> Vice President, Apache Stratos >>> Director - Cloud Architecture; WSO2 Inc. >>> Mobile : +94714289692 >>> Blog : http://lakmalsview.blogspot.com/ >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Rajkumar Rajaratnam >> Committer & PMC Member, Apache Stratos >> Software Engineer, WSO2 >> >> Mobile : +94777568639 >> Blog : rajkumarr.com >> > > > > -- > -- > Lahiru Sandaruwan > Committer and PMC member, Apache Stratos, > Senior Software Engineer, > WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com > lean.enterprise.middleware > > phone: +94773325954 > email: lahi...@wso2.com blog: http://lahiruwrites.blogspot.com/ > linked-in: http://lk.linkedin.com/pub/lahiru-sandaruwan/16/153/146 > > -- Imesh Gunaratne Technical Lead, WSO2 Committer & PMC Member, Apache Stratos
