[PVE-User] DRS proxmox

[Mohamed Sadok Ben Jazia]

Thank you thomas,
As i'm deploying a large number of CT, this is the best algorithm, and as i
mentioned above, i can't wait next version of pve for live migration, also
doing a backup/restore is not friendly once it takes time.
I'm going to commit this small method in github and upgrade it later.
Best regards
Le 6 avr. 2016 7:28 AM, "Thomas Lamprecht" <t.lamprecht at proxmox.com> a
écrit :

> Hi,
>
> On 04/05/2016 12:03 PM, Mohamed Sadok Ben Jazia wrote:
> > Thank you Thomas
> > I'm going to describe my thoughts about the DRS based on the project i'm
> > working on, and i was stuck in this step.
> > Starting from many clusters in different sub nets and locations, i want
> > create a large number of LXC containers for my clients.
> > So for one cluster with many nodes and shared storage, it's a greedy
> > algorithm with best matches, and by considering the LXC live migration is
> > not yet available, this is what i'm doing:
> >
> > For each new container, or re-sizing an old one, i loop all available
> nodes
> > in the cluster and see the one that uses more ressources without reaching
> > the max possible hardware resources, in order to make nodes full.
> > Optimization of this method is doing a silent migration when a container
> is
> > rebooted or restarted based on the same logic.
>
> Ah okay, now I understand. This would be and "CT deployment tool" and
> should be definitively more stable as the problems I mentioned in my email.
> It does not really change dynamically the cluster but rather on the
> checkpoints (create, stop CT), sounds quite cool.
>
> >
> > What do you think of my logic (if it's clear until now).
>
> The summarize from above seems good to me, if you really plan to
> create/start/stop a lot of containers in the cluster try to keep the
> evaluation algorithm rather simple so that it runs in O(n) time, else
> you could run into performance problems.
>
> > Also, this point is not clear for me (* wait for the cluster to become
> > stable (e.g. a few minutes no cluster action), can you explain the
> reason.
>
> I thought here of (live) migrations, they give the network, and the
> nodes some load, whille besides your algorithm there may also run other
> - user triggered - actions which also need resources.
> Further I want to wait a bit of time to let the cluster stabilize, else
> it could trigger unnecessary migrations or an out of control feedback
> loop, but this affects you less as you use static resource values (CPU
> cores, max ram), as far as I've understood.
>
> best regards,
> Thomas
>
> > On 5 April 2016 at 10:42, Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht at proxmox.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> this idea was proposed quite some time ago and we planned to implement
> >> it in the pve-ha-manager stack,
> >> as it provides a lot of functionality needed for that.
> >>
> >> The general idea from our side is:
> >> * wait for the cluster to become stable (e.g. a few minutes no cluster
> >> action),
> >> * evaluate the load
> >> * see if there is a configuration which makes the load more equal, here
> >> migrate "lighter" VMs first else we may get to big system time delays
> >> which are bad for such systems and can cause instability.
> >> * if there is any such configuration try to achieve it (migrating one VM
> >> at a time).
> >> * start at the beginning.
> >>
> >> There are a few question open, e.g. how to determine load _correctly_ as
> >> there are various setups and indicators from memory, cpu, network and
> >> IO, which may have different effects on different setups.
> >> What happens in edge cases (fencing, ...)
> >>
> >> Also a static value which can be assigned to VMs would be nice, as just
> >> because a VM is lightweight
> >>
> >> Thus we want to start simple, i.e. use static load balance, then a
> >> simple dynamic on (e.g. CPU only) and at best with a simulation which
> >> can evaluate how often migration happened and so on (wishlist).
> >> And AFAIK, we want to "limit" it to HA Groups, meaning this group should
> >> be balanced over the group assigned nodes.
> >>
> >> The point of this message is to summarize our (or better my) thoughts to
> >> that topic and to notify you that there is already something planned and
> >> also that there is a Project by us which someone who wants to implement
> >> that could make use of, namely the Proxmox VE HA Manager.
> >>
> >> I appreciate the fact that you want to make something for PVE and wish
> >> you the best,
> >>  it could be a though worth for you to use some of the HA manager stack
> >> using perl would help here, this way it could also land upstream.
> >>
> >> best regards,
> >> Thomas
> >>
> >>
> >> On 04/05/2016 11:04 AM, Mohamed Sadok Ben Jazia wrote:
> >>> Hi list,
> >>> For my proxmox infrastructure, i set a number of nodes of a cluster.
> >>> I'm looking for a load-balancer, to make those tasks:
> >>> -Choose the best node for a just created or resized CT/VM.
> >>> -Live migration to gain ressources on nodes, or for optimisation.
> >>> My idea is to create a dynamic resources scheduler that is integrated
> >>> to my server side script to perform this function.
> >>>
> >>> Here is the ling to the project
> >>>
> >>> https://github.com/BenJaziaSadok/proxmox-DRS
> >>>
> >>> Any help with the algorithm or in the development is welcome
> >>>
> >>> Thank you
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> pve-user mailing list
> >>> pve-user at pve.proxmox.com
> >>> http://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user
> >>>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> pve-user mailing list
> >> pve-user at pve.proxmox.com
> >> http://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > pve-user mailing list
> > pve-user at pve.proxmox.com
> > http://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user
> >
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> pve-user mailing list
> pve-user at pve.proxmox.com
> http://pve.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-user
>