On 10/08/2013 09:25 PM, Leonardo Bianconi wrote:
________________________________________
De: Itamar Heim [ih...@redhat.com]
Enviado: domingo, 29 de setembro de 2013 8:55
Para: Leonardo Bianconi
Cc: Roy Golan; engine-devel@ovirt.org
Assunto: Re: [Engine-devel] Cluster default with empty processor name with
PPC64 support
On 09/04/2013 03:50 PM, Leonardo Bianconi wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Roy Golan [mailto:rgo...@redhat.com]
Sent: quarta-feira, 4 de setembro de 2013 08:13
To: Leonardo Bianconi
Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org
Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Cluster default with empty processor name with
PPC64 support
On 09/02/2013 03:35 PM, Leonardo Bianconi wrote:
From: Roy Golan [mailto:rgo...@redhat.com]
Sent: domingo, 1 de setembro de 2013 05:07
To: Leonardo Bianconi
Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org
Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] Cluster default with empty processor
name with PPC64 support
On 08/30/2013 10:51 PM, Leonardo Bianconi wrote:
Hi everyone!
During the development of PPC64 support in the engine, we faced some UX issues
regarding the default Cluster (that Cluster with
empty processor name).
Currently, oVirt engine allows the default Cluster to contain empty processor
name, and the administrator can add VMs and/or
Templates to it. The processor name can be assigned later, editing the cluster
or assigning a valid host to it.
During the implementation of PPC64 support on the engine, the field
"architecture" was added to Clusters, VMs and Templates
entities.
So we have the following questions regarding how the UI should behave:
- Shall we keep allowing the administrator to assign VMs and Templates to the
Cluster with no processor name or assigned
architecture ?
-> If we have an "yes" for the question above:
-- We will have to assign the architecture to the Cluster based
on the OS of the first assigned VM, and the processor name
could be defined the same way as currently ... editing the Cluster or assigning
a compatible Host to it.
-- The VM creation popup will have to be able
to indicate the architecture of each OS ... some OSes have the same
name, and it may get ambiguous since the Cluster architecture is still
undefined at that point (before the first VM get already created).
Thanks!
Regards.
Leonardo Bianconi
To add VMs you anyway need a running host in the cluster which means the cpu
name and the architecture would be the host's.
So we can keep the cluster attributes - "cpu name" and "arch" consistent and
allow them to be empty on creation.
Hi Roy!
There is a way to add VMs in a cluster with no hosts running. Steps to
reproduce:
- Initialize the oVirt engine with a new data base
- Create a new Cluster (I will call it of newCluster) in the Data
Center Default
- Add a host in the newCluster
- Add a Storage
- Create a VM in the Cluster Default
Result: The system allows a VM in a cluster with no Hosts running in it.
Is it a bug or a system functionality? If it's a functionality, the issue above
can happen.
Just to clear this one - its a functional thing. its a bit confusing but not
too complicated:
Storage and all its related actions/entities are related to the Data Center
(aka, code-wise storage pool). Its possible to create a VM
once the DC is up, without a cluster i.e also provision disks to it and so on.
Cluster is know as the "migration domain" wrt VMs. so CPU arch stuff, network
config etc, must be homogeneous in order for VMs to
migrate between hosts which means we must have a running cluster i.e at least 1
running host in it.
Roy, thank you for the explanation! It`s clear now
Thanks!!
Regards.
Leonardo Bianconi
Hi Itamar, sorry about the late replay.
Leonardo - slightly related - is this ppc big endian, small endian? any
thoughts on current and future plans around endianes?
PPC64 is big endian, but they are working to enable little endian.
also, can you help with my, well, ignorance - are ppc7+/ppc8[1] a newer
cpu level, also not backward compatible, etc.?
Yes, Power7 and Power8 are different on family of processors. On the oVirt
wiki, pinatti, from IBM, wrote that the CPUs wouldn't be compatible with each
other, so I asked him about the backward compatibility and he answered they
don't know what will be the compatibility level between Power7 and Power8.
More information about Power8 can be found here in
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2047733/ibms-power8-opens-up-to-component-makers.html
Thanks,
Itamar
[1] https://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2013-08/msg00154.html
(courtesy of rich jones)
ok, i guess we'll handle little endian and power8 when they become
relevant...
_______________________________________________
Engine-devel mailing list
Engine-devel@ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
