.TH HBAL 1 2009-03-23 htools "Ganeti H-tools" .SH NAME hbal \- Cluster balancer for Ganeti .SH SYNOPSIS .B hbal .B "[-C]" .B "[-p]" .B "[-o]" .B "[-v... | -q]" .BI "[-l" limit "]" .BI "[-O" name... "]" .BI "[-e" score "]" .BI "[-m " cluster "]" .BI "[-n " nodes-file " ]" .BI "[-i " instances-file "]" .B hbal .B --version .SH DESCRIPTION hbal is a cluster balancer that looks at the current state of the cluster (nodes with their total and free disk, memory, etc.) and instance placement and computes a series of steps designed to bring the cluster into a better state. The algorithm to do so is designed to be stable (i.e. it will give you the same results when restarting it from the middle of the solution) and reasonably fast. It is not, however, designed to be a perfect algorithm - it is possible to make it go into a corner from which it can find no improvement, because it only look one "step" ahead. By default, the program will show the solution incrementally as it is computed, in a somewhat cryptic format; for getting the actual Ganeti command list, use the \fB-C\fR option. .SS ALGORITHM The program works in independent steps; at each step, we compute the best instance move that lowers the cluster score. The possible move type for an instance are combinations of failover/migrate and replace-disks such that we change one of the instance nodes, and the other one remains (but possibly with changed role, e.g. from primary it becomes secondary). The list is: .RS 4 .TP 3 \(em failover (f) .TP \(em replace secondary (r) .TP \(em replace primary, a composite move (f, r, f) .TP \(em failover and replace secondary, also composite (f, r) .TP \(em replace secondary and failover, also composite (r, f) .RE We don't do the only remaining possibility of replacing both nodes (r,f,r,f or the equivalent f,r,f,r) since these move needs an exhaustive search over both candidate primary and secondary nodes, and is O(n*n) in the number of nodes. Furthermore, it doesn't seems to give better scores but will result in more disk replacements. .SS CLUSTER SCORING As said before, the algorithm tries to minimise the cluster score at each step. Currently this score is computed as a sum of the following components: .RS 4 .TP 3 \(em coefficient of variance of the percent of free memory .TP \(em coefficient of variance of the percent of reserved memory .TP \(em coefficient of variance of the percent of free disk .TP \(em percentage of nodes failing N+1 check .TP \(em percentage of instances living (either as primary or secondary) on offline nodes .RE The free memory and free disk values help ensure that all nodes are somewhat balanced in their resource usage. The reserved memory helps to ensure that nodes are somewhat balanced in holding secondary instances, and that no node keeps too much memory reserved for N+1. And finally, the N+1 percentage helps guide the algorithm towards eliminating N+1 failures, if possible. Except for the N+1 failures and offline instances percentage, we use the coefficient of variance since this brings the values into the same unit so to speak, and with a restrict domain of values (between zero and one). The percentage of N+1 failures, while also in this numeric range, doesn't actually has the same meaning, but it has shown to work well. The other alternative, using for N+1 checks the coefficient of variance of (N+1 fail=1, N+1 pass=0) across nodes could hint the algorithm to make more N+1 failures if most nodes are N+1 fail already. Since this (making N+1 failures) is not allowed by other rules of the algorithm, so the N+1 checks would simply not work anymore in this case. The offline instances percentage (meaning the percentage of instances living on offline nodes) will cause the algorithm to actively move instances away from offline nodes. This, coupled with the restriction on placement given by offline nodes, will cause evacuation of such nodes. On a perfectly balanced cluster (all nodes the same size, all instances the same size and spread across the nodes equally), all values would be zero. This doesn't happen too often in practice :) .SS OFFLINE INSTANCES Since current Ganeti versions do not report the memory used by offline (down) instances, ignoring the run status of instances will cause wrong calculations. For this reason, the algorithm subtracts the memory size of down instances from the free node memory of their primary node, in effect simulating the startup of such instances. .SS OTHER POSSIBLE METRICS It would be desirable to add more metrics to the algorithm, especially dynamically-computed metrics, such as: .RS 4 .TP 3 \(em CPU usage of instances, combined with VCPU versus PCPU count .TP \(em Disk IO usage .TP \(em Network IO .RE .SH OPTIONS The options that can be passed to the program are as follows: .TP .B -C, --print-commands Print the command list at the end of the run. Without this, the program will only show a shorter, but cryptic output. .TP .B -p, --print-nodes Prints the before and after node status, in a format designed to allow the user to understand the node's most important parameters. The node list will contain these informations: .RS .TP .B F a character denoting the status of the node, with '-' meaning an offline node, '*' meaning N+1 failure and blank meaning a good node .TP .B Name the node name .TP .B t_mem the total node memory .TP .B n_mem the memory used by the node itself .TP .B i_mem the memory used by instances .TP .B x_mem amount memory which seems to be in use but cannot be determined why or by which instance; usually this means that the hypervisor has some overhead or that there are other reporting errors .TP .B f_mem the free node memory .TP .B r_mem the reserved node memory, which is the amount of free memory needed for N+1 compliance .TP .B t_dsk total disk .TP .B f_dsk free disk .TP .B pri number of primary instances .TP .B sec number of secondary instances .TP .B p_fmem percent of free memory .TP .B p_fdsk percent of free disk .RE .TP .B -o, --oneline Only shows a one-line output from the program, designed for the case when one wants to look at multiple clusters at once and check their status. The line will contain four fields: .RS .RS 4 .TP 3 \(em initial cluster score .TP \(em number of steps in the solution .TP \(em final cluster score .TP \(em improvement in the cluster score .RE .RE .TP .BI "-O " name This option (which can be given multiple times) will mark nodes as being \fIoffline\fR. This means a couple of things: .RS .RS 4 .TP 3 \(em instances won't be placed on these nodes, not even temporarily; e.g. the \fIreplace primary\fR move is not available if the secondary node is offline, since this move requires a failover. .TP \(em these nodes will not be included in the score calculation (except for the percentage of instances on offline nodes) .RE .RE .TP .BI "-e" score ", --min-score=" score This parameter denotes the minimum score we are happy with and alters the computation in two ways: .RS .RS 4 .TP 3 \(em if the cluster has the initial score lower than this value, then we don't enter the algorithm at all, and exit with success .TP \(em during the iterative process, if we reach a score lower than this value, we exit the algorithm .RE The default value of the parameter is currently \fI1e-9\fR (chosen empirically). .RE .TP .BI "-n" nodefile ", --nodes=" nodefile The name of the file holding node information (if not collecting via RAPI), instead of the default \fInodes\fR file (but see below how to customize the default value via the environment). .TP .BI "-i" instancefile ", --instances=" instancefile The name of the file holding instance information (if not collecting via RAPI), instead of the default \fIinstances\fR file (but see below how to customize the default value via the environment). .TP .BI "-m" cluster Collect data not from files but directly from the .I cluster given as an argument via RAPI. This work for both Ganeti 1.2 and Ganeti 2.0. .TP .BI "-l" N ", --max-length=" N Restrict the solution to this length. This can be used for example to automate the execution of the balancing. .TP .B -v, --verbose Increase the output verbosity. Each usage of this option will increase the verbosity (currently more than 2 doesn't make sense) from the default of one. .TP .B -q, --quiet Decrease the output verbosity. Each usage of this option will decrease the verbosity (less than zero doesn't make sense) from the default of one. .TP .B -V, --version Just show the program version and exit. .SH EXIT STATUS The exist status of the command will be zero, unless for some reason the algorithm fatally failed (e.g. wrong node or instance data). .SH ENVIRONMENT If the variables \fBHTOOLS_NODES\fR and \fBHTOOLS_INSTANCES\fR are present in the environment, they will override the default names for the nodes and instances files. These will have of course no effect when RAPI is used. .SH BUGS The program does not check its input data for consistency, and aborts with cryptic errors messages in this case. The algorithm is not perfect. The algorithm doesn't deal with non-\fBdrbd\fR instances, and chokes on input data which has such instances. The output format is not easily scriptable, and the program should feed moves directly into Ganeti (either via RAPI or via a gnt-debug input file). .SH EXAMPLE Note that this example are not for the latest version (they don't have full node data). .SS Default output With the default options, the program shows each individual step and the improvements it brings in cluster score: .in +4n .nf .RB "$" " hbal" Loaded 20 nodes, 80 instances Cluster is not N+1 happy, continuing but no guarantee that the cluster will end N+1 happy. Initial score: 0.52329131 Trying to minimize the CV... 1. instance14 node1:node10 => node16:node10 0.42109120 a=f r:node16 f 2. instance54 node4:node15 => node16:node15 0.31904594 a=f r:node16 f 3. instance4 node5:node2 => node2:node16 0.26611015 a=f r:node16 4. instance48 node18:node20 => node2:node18 0.21361717 a=r:node2 f 5. instance93 node19:node18 => node16:node19 0.16166425 a=r:node16 f 6. instance89 node3:node20 => node2:node3 0.11005629 a=r:node2 f 7. instance5 node6:node2 => node16:node6 0.05841589 a=r:node16 f 8. instance94 node7:node20 => node20:node16 0.00658759 a=f r:node16 9. instance44 node20:node2 => node2:node15 0.00438740 a=f r:node15 10. instance62 node14:node18 => node14:node16 0.00390087 a=r:node16 11. instance13 node11:node14 => node11:node16 0.00361787 a=r:node16 12. instance19 node10:node11 => node10:node7 0.00336636 a=r:node7 13. instance43 node12:node13 => node12:node1 0.00305681 a=r:node1 14. instance1 node1:node2 => node1:node4 0.00263124 a=r:node4 15. instance58 node19:node20 => node19:node17 0.00252594 a=r:node17 Cluster score improved from 0.52329131 to 0.00252594 .fi .in In the above output, we can see: - the input data (here from files) shows a cluster with 20 nodes and 80 instances - the cluster is not initially N+1 compliant - the initial score is 0.52329131 The step list follows, showing the instance, its initial primary/secondary nodes, the new primary secondary, the cluster list, and the actions taken in this step (with 'f' denoting failover/migrate and 'r' denoting replace secondary). Finally, the program shows the improvement in cluster score. A more detailed output is obtained via the \fB-C\fR and \fB-p\fR options: .in +4n .nf .RB "$" " hbal" Loaded 20 nodes, 80 instances Cluster is not N+1 happy, continuing but no guarantee that the cluster will end N+1 happy. Initial cluster status: N1 Name t_mem f_mem r_mem t_dsk f_dsk pri sec p_fmem p_fdsk * node1 32762 1280 6000 1861 1026 5 3 0.03907 0.55179 node2 32762 31280 12000 1861 1026 0 8 0.95476 0.55179 * node3 32762 1280 6000 1861 1026 5 3 0.03907 0.55179 * node4 32762 1280 6000 1861 1026 5 3 0.03907 0.55179 * node5 32762 1280 6000 1861 978 5 5 0.03907 0.52573 * node6 32762 1280 6000 1861 1026 5 3 0.03907 0.55179 * node7 32762 1280 6000 1861 1026 5 3 0.03907 0.55179 node8 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 node9 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 * node10 32762 7280 12000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 node11 32762 7280 6000 1861 922 4 5 0.22221 0.49577 node12 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 node13 32762 7280 6000 1861 922 4 5 0.22221 0.49577 node14 32762 7280 6000 1861 922 4 5 0.22221 0.49577 * node15 32762 7280 12000 1861 1131 4 3 0.22221 0.60782 node16 32762 31280 0 1861 1860 0 0 0.95476 1.00000 node17 32762 7280 6000 1861 1106 5 3 0.22221 0.59479 * node18 32762 1280 6000 1396 561 5 3 0.03907 0.40239 * node19 32762 1280 6000 1861 1026 5 3 0.03907 0.55179 node20 32762 13280 12000 1861 689 3 9 0.40535 0.37068 Initial score: 0.52329131 Trying to minimize the CV... 1. instance14 node1:node10 => node16:node10 0.42109120 a=f r:node16 f 2. instance54 node4:node15 => node16:node15 0.31904594 a=f r:node16 f 3. instance4 node5:node2 => node2:node16 0.26611015 a=f r:node16 4. instance48 node18:node20 => node2:node18 0.21361717 a=r:node2 f 5. instance93 node19:node18 => node16:node19 0.16166425 a=r:node16 f 6. instance89 node3:node20 => node2:node3 0.11005629 a=r:node2 f 7. instance5 node6:node2 => node16:node6 0.05841589 a=r:node16 f 8. instance94 node7:node20 => node20:node16 0.00658759 a=f r:node16 9. instance44 node20:node2 => node2:node15 0.00438740 a=f r:node15 10. instance62 node14:node18 => node14:node16 0.00390087 a=r:node16 11. instance13 node11:node14 => node11:node16 0.00361787 a=r:node16 12. instance19 node10:node11 => node10:node7 0.00336636 a=r:node7 13. instance43 node12:node13 => node12:node1 0.00305681 a=r:node1 14. instance1 node1:node2 => node1:node4 0.00263124 a=r:node4 15. instance58 node19:node20 => node19:node17 0.00252594 a=r:node17 Cluster score improved from 0.52329131 to 0.00252594 Commands to run to reach the above solution: echo step 1 echo gnt-instance migrate instance14 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance14 echo gnt-instance migrate instance14 echo step 2 echo gnt-instance migrate instance54 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance54 echo gnt-instance migrate instance54 echo step 3 echo gnt-instance migrate instance4 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance4 echo step 4 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node2 instance48 echo gnt-instance migrate instance48 echo step 5 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance93 echo gnt-instance migrate instance93 echo step 6 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node2 instance89 echo gnt-instance migrate instance89 echo step 7 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance5 echo gnt-instance migrate instance5 echo step 8 echo gnt-instance migrate instance94 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance94 echo step 9 echo gnt-instance migrate instance44 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node15 instance44 echo step 10 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance62 echo step 11 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance13 echo step 12 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node7 instance19 echo step 13 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node1 instance43 echo step 14 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node4 instance1 echo step 15 echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node17 instance58 Final cluster status: N1 Name t_mem f_mem r_mem t_dsk f_dsk pri sec p_fmem p_fdsk node1 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 node2 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 node3 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 node4 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 node5 32762 7280 6000 1861 1078 4 5 0.22221 0.57947 node6 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 node7 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 node8 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 node9 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 node10 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 node11 32762 7280 6000 1861 1022 4 4 0.22221 0.54951 node12 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 node13 32762 7280 6000 1861 1022 4 4 0.22221 0.54951 node14 32762 7280 6000 1861 1022 4 4 0.22221 0.54951 node15 32762 7280 6000 1861 1031 4 4 0.22221 0.55408 node16 32762 7280 6000 1861 1060 4 4 0.22221 0.57007 node17 32762 7280 6000 1861 1006 5 4 0.22221 0.54105 node18 32762 7280 6000 1396 761 4 2 0.22221 0.54570 node19 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 node20 32762 13280 6000 1861 1089 3 5 0.40535 0.58565 .fi .in Here we see, beside the step list, the initial and final cluster status, with the final one showing all nodes being N+1 compliant, and the command list to reach the final solution. In the initial listing, we see which nodes are not N+1 compliant. The algorithm is stable as long as each step above is fully completed, e.g. in step 8, both the migrate and the replace-disks are done. Otherwise, if only the migrate is done, the input data is changed in a way that the program will output a different solution list (but hopefully will end in the same state). .SH SEE ALSO .BR hn1 "(1), " hscan "(1), " ganeti "(7), " gnt-instance "(8), " .BR gnt-node "(8)"