[one-users] "force" deploy of VM
mbeninca at gmail.com
Wed Mar 19 07:52:52 PDT 2014
Ok, thanks for clarifying.
I'll already had a look at the script. I believe I can manage.
I'll let you know in case of problems, anyway :-)
Thanks a lot.
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 3:08 PM, Carlos Martín Sánchez <
cmartin at opennebula.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Mario Benincasa <mbeninca at gmail.com>wrote:
>> Thanks Carlos for your answer.
>> About your suggestion, do you mean calling the fault tolerance script
>> (host_error.rb) with the "-f" option?
>> Or some more tweaking?
>> Because the comments in the oned.conf file say "force resubmission of
>> suspended VMs".
>> In my case VMs are not in suspended state, but in pending state.
>> Resubmission means redeploy, i.e. new VM id allocated?
> I was suggesting to modify the script, and perform the onevm deploy just
> after the vm.delete(true) call.
> The hook is a simple ruby script (host_error.rb), it shouldn't be too
> difficult. But if are not familiar with the ruby API, you can also create
> another bash script to perform the deployment, and then call that one from
> the host_error.rb hook.
> Let us know if you run into any problems.
> Carlos Martín, MSc
> Project Engineer
> OpenNebula - Flexible Enterprise Cloud Made Simple
> www.OpenNebula.org <http://www.opennebula.org/> | cmartin at opennebula.org
> | @OpenNebula <http://twitter.com/opennebula> <cmartin at opennebula.org>
>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Carlos Martín Sánchez <
>> cmartin at opennebula.org> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Mario Benincasa <mbeninca at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> Hi all
>>>> I have a simple question (well I believe it is simple :-) )
>>>> I searched through documentation and mailing list archive, but I wasn't
>>>> able to find anything.
>>>> Apologies if the question has already been answered somewhere.
>>>> After template instantiation, the VM is placed in pending state until
>>>> the scheduler decides to run it.
>>>> If there are not enough resources, it will remain in pending state.
>>>> "onevm deploy" will anyway run it, even in case of not enough
>>>> My question is: is it possible to automatically have the deploy of the
>>>> VM, even if the scheduler would leave it in pending state?
>>>> I need this for the fault tolerance script: I have two nodes, each
>>>> running a certain number of VMs. In case a node crashes, I want the VMs to
>>>> be deployed in the surviving node, even if the scheduler disagrees.
>>>> Currently, the VMs are left in pending state, thus they are not
>>>> recovering the service. Of course a manual "onevm deploy" would recover,
>>>> but I would like to have it automatically :-)
>>>> The impacted resource appears to be the RAM: the sum of the VMs' RAM
>>>> allocation exceeds the physical RAM, but in real operating conditions the
>>>> RAM usage is quite under the allocated RAM, and thus I expect no problem in
>>>> such an over provisioning.
>>>> Thanks for any hint.
>>> We don't have any way to tell the scheduler to ignore the VM
>>> requirements, and I think it would be a problematic feature. Memory
>>> overcommitment (up to a certain amount) may not have a noticeable impact,
>>> but a full disk will certainly do.
>>> I think your best option is to have the fault tolerance script do the
>>> forced deploy.
>>> Carlos Martín, MSc
>>> Project Engineer
>>> OpenNebula - Flexible Enterprise Cloud Made Simple
>>> www.OpenNebula.org <http://www.opennebula.org/> | cmartin at opennebula.org
>>> | @OpenNebula <http://twitter.com/opennebula> <cmartin at opennebula.org>
>> Mario Benincasa
>> Via del Conservatorio 55
>> 00186 Roma - Italy
>> tel. +39 066872917
>> mob. +39 3346210331
>> fax: +39 0697656510
>> email: mbeninca at gmail.com
Via del Conservatorio 55
00186 Roma - Italy
tel. +39 066872917
mob. +39 3346210331
fax: +39 0697656510
email: mbeninca at gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Users