[one-users] Adding test system datastore

[Carlos Martín Sánchez]

Hi there,

Maybe we could try to replicate the 'onehost disable' behaviour.
That is, a disabled system DS would be ignored by the scheduler, but you
can still deploy VMs manually there.

What do you think? Should I open a ticket for this?

Regards

--
Carlos Martín, MSc
Project Engineer
OpenNebula - Flexible Enterprise Cloud Made Simple
www.OpenNebula.org | cmartin at opennebula.org |
@OpenNebula<http://twitter.com/opennebula><cmartin at opennebula.org>


On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Stefan Kooman <stefan at bit.nl> wrote:

> Quoting Daniel Dehennin (daniel.dehennin at baby-gnu.org):
> > Stefan Kooman <stefan at bit.nl> writes:
> >
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > You can, in your vm template you can put the following:
> > >
> > > SCHED_DS_REQUIREMENTS="NAME=NAMEOFYOURTESTDATASTORE". All other DS'es
> > > will be filtered out.
> >
> > This will force a VM to use this one when it have this
> > SCHED_DS_REQUIREMENTS, but what about all other VMs which do not have
> > any requirements set?
> >
> > As far as I understand, they will use it too.
>
> They might use it. It depends on the policy set on the DS (packing,
> striping or custom) [1]. You have to set the requirement on each and
> every vm (template) to make sure they end up in the correct datastore.
> See sched.log to see what priorities your datastores end up with. Our
> datastores end up with the same priority and the first one in the list
> gets chosen.
>
> Gr. Stefan
>
> [1]:
>
> http://docs.opennebula.org/stable/administration/storage/system_ds.html?highlight=system%20datastores
>
> >
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > Actually I was looking for this as well :). For example I would like to
> > > be able to "link" certain datastores to "groups", i.e. use datastore A
> > > for group A by default instead of having it defined in every single
> > > template. If users of group A have the possibility to define their own
> > > templates and they would forget the "SCHED_DS_REQUIREMENTS" to their
> > > datastore it would end up somewhere else (if at least they have enough
> > > rights on other (system) datastores). Basically it would be nice to
> have
> > > even more filtering capabitilites to ensure correct
> > > placement/deployment.
> >
> > If I remember correctly, I heard about some group and resource providers
> > mechanisms for 4.6, it may address this.
> >
> > Regards.
> >
> > --
> > Daniel Dehennin
> > Récupérer ma clef GPG: gpg --recv-keys 0xCC1E9E5B7A6FE2DF
> > Fingerprint: 3E69 014E 5C23 50E8 9ED6  2AAD CC1E 9E5B 7A6F E2DF
>
>
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Users mailing list
> > Users at lists.opennebula.org
> > http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org
>
>
> --
> | BIT BV  http://www.bit.nl/        Kamer van Koophandel 09090351
> | GPG: 0xD14839C6                   +31 318 648 688 / info at bit.nl
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iF4EAREIAAYFAlMCMEoACgkQTyGgYdFIOcbqOwEAjnynlt3OOcgnm+c4FoVA22uj
> q6mKLNQ4iW5QqaGthhcBAJxYt3gkqWRP3iXV/rPME0/Bq/ZOm8UVpEa9PEqIBO7h
> =tDzh
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at lists.opennebula.org
> http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opennebula.org/pipermail/users-opennebula.org/attachments/20140218/60014104/attachment-0002.htm>