[one-users] scheduler interval
andreagardiman at gmail.com
Fri Mar 7 07:29:34 PST 2014
Ok, but I don't understand why it works like a pull model instead of push.
Is so because of a too high load matter or only because the initial
architectural decision was to work like that and now it is still so?
What would be the drawbacks if were the core,immediately every time a
request arrive, tell to the scheduler to schedule that request?
My question comes because I'm working on improving the deployment time of
VMs for my master thesis, and I understood that I can choose to deploy VMs
little by little, or immediately as they come but I can't see the cases in
which deploy VMs little by little would be better that process them
Thanks a lot,
On Mar 7, 2014 10:58 AM, "Carlos Martín Sánchez" <cmartin at opennebula.org>
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Andrea Gardiman <andreagardiman at gmail.com>
>> Dear all,
>> I do not understand the usefulness of the scheduler parameter
>> "SCHED_INTERVAL". Why the scheduler act as a periodic task and have to wait
>> a fixed period to schedule all the pending jobs instead of to be
>> event-driven and schedule immediately a request?
>> What are the benefits and the drawbacks, besides the wait?
>> Thanks a lot,
>> Andrea Gardiman.
> The scheduler is a separate daemon. So it polls the core periodically to
> look for pending VMs.
> The usefulness of the SCHED_INTERVAL is that, combined with the other
> config parameters  MAX_DISPATCH and MAX_HOST, allows you to configure a
> "buffer" to deploy VMs little by little, or immediately as they come.
>  http://docs.opennebula.org/stable/administration/references/schg.html
> 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>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Users