root / hbal.1 @ 848a9ac5
History | View | Annotate | Download (19.4 kB)
1 |
.TH HBAL 1 2009-03-23 htools "Ganeti H-tools" |
---|---|
2 |
.SH NAME |
3 |
hbal \- Cluster balancer for Ganeti |
4 |
|
5 |
.SH SYNOPSIS |
6 |
.B hbal |
7 |
.B "[backend options...]" |
8 |
.B "[algorithm options...]" |
9 |
.B "[reporting options...]" |
10 |
|
11 |
.B hbal |
12 |
.B --version |
13 |
|
14 |
.TP |
15 |
Backend options: |
16 |
.BI "[ -m " cluster " ]" |
17 |
| |
18 |
.BI "[ -L[" path "]]" |
19 |
| |
20 |
.BI "[ -n " nodes-file " ]" |
21 |
.BI "[ -i " instances-file " ]" |
22 |
|
23 |
.TP |
24 |
Algorithm options: |
25 |
.BI "[ --max-cpu " cpu-ratio " ]" |
26 |
.BI "[ --min-disk " disk-ratio " ]" |
27 |
.BI "[ -l " limit " ]" |
28 |
.BI "[ -e " score " ]" |
29 |
.BI "[ -O " name... " ]" |
30 |
|
31 |
.TP |
32 |
Reporting options: |
33 |
.BI "[ -C[" file "] ]" |
34 |
.B "[ -p ]" |
35 |
.B "[ -o ]" |
36 |
.B "[ -v... | -q ]" |
37 |
|
38 |
|
39 |
.SH DESCRIPTION |
40 |
hbal is a cluster balancer that looks at the current state of the |
41 |
cluster (nodes with their total and free disk, memory, etc.) and |
42 |
instance placement and computes a series of steps designed to bring |
43 |
the cluster into a better state. |
44 |
|
45 |
The algorithm to do so is designed to be stable (i.e. it will give you |
46 |
the same results when restarting it from the middle of the solution) |
47 |
and reasonably fast. It is not, however, designed to be a perfect |
48 |
algorithm - it is possible to make it go into a corner from which it |
49 |
can find no improvement, because it only look one "step" ahead. |
50 |
|
51 |
By default, the program will show the solution incrementally as it is |
52 |
computed, in a somewhat cryptic format; for getting the actual Ganeti |
53 |
command list, use the \fB-C\fR option. |
54 |
|
55 |
.SS ALGORITHM |
56 |
|
57 |
The program works in independent steps; at each step, we compute the |
58 |
best instance move that lowers the cluster score. |
59 |
|
60 |
The possible move type for an instance are combinations of |
61 |
failover/migrate and replace-disks such that we change one of the |
62 |
instance nodes, and the other one remains (but possibly with changed |
63 |
role, e.g. from primary it becomes secondary). The list is: |
64 |
.RS 4 |
65 |
.TP 3 |
66 |
\(em |
67 |
failover (f) |
68 |
.TP |
69 |
\(em |
70 |
replace secondary (r) |
71 |
.TP |
72 |
\(em |
73 |
replace primary, a composite move (f, r, f) |
74 |
.TP |
75 |
\(em |
76 |
failover and replace secondary, also composite (f, r) |
77 |
.TP |
78 |
\(em |
79 |
replace secondary and failover, also composite (r, f) |
80 |
.RE |
81 |
|
82 |
We don't do the only remaining possibility of replacing both nodes |
83 |
(r,f,r,f or the equivalent f,r,f,r) since these move needs an |
84 |
exhaustive search over both candidate primary and secondary nodes, and |
85 |
is O(n*n) in the number of nodes. Furthermore, it doesn't seems to |
86 |
give better scores but will result in more disk replacements. |
87 |
|
88 |
.SS CLUSTER SCORING |
89 |
|
90 |
As said before, the algorithm tries to minimise the cluster score at |
91 |
each step. Currently this score is computed as a sum of the following |
92 |
components: |
93 |
.RS 4 |
94 |
.TP 3 |
95 |
\(em |
96 |
coefficient of variance of the percent of free memory |
97 |
.TP |
98 |
\(em |
99 |
coefficient of variance of the percent of reserved memory |
100 |
.TP |
101 |
\(em |
102 |
coefficient of variance of the percent of free disk |
103 |
.TP |
104 |
\(em |
105 |
percentage of nodes failing N+1 check |
106 |
.TP |
107 |
\(em |
108 |
percentage of instances living (either as primary or secondary) on |
109 |
offline nodes |
110 |
.TP |
111 |
\(em |
112 |
coefficent of variance of the ratio of virtual-to-physical cpus (for |
113 |
primary instaces of the node) |
114 |
.RE |
115 |
|
116 |
The free memory and free disk values help ensure that all nodes are |
117 |
somewhat balanced in their resource usage. The reserved memory helps |
118 |
to ensure that nodes are somewhat balanced in holding secondary |
119 |
instances, and that no node keeps too much memory reserved for |
120 |
N+1. And finally, the N+1 percentage helps guide the algorithm towards |
121 |
eliminating N+1 failures, if possible. |
122 |
|
123 |
Except for the N+1 failures and offline instances percentage, we use |
124 |
the coefficient of variance since this brings the values into the same |
125 |
unit so to speak, and with a restrict domain of values (between zero |
126 |
and one). The percentage of N+1 failures, while also in this numeric |
127 |
range, doesn't actually has the same meaning, but it has shown to work |
128 |
well. |
129 |
|
130 |
The other alternative, using for N+1 checks the coefficient of |
131 |
variance of (N+1 fail=1, N+1 pass=0) across nodes could hint the |
132 |
algorithm to make more N+1 failures if most nodes are N+1 fail |
133 |
already. Since this (making N+1 failures) is not allowed by other |
134 |
rules of the algorithm, so the N+1 checks would simply not work |
135 |
anymore in this case. |
136 |
|
137 |
The offline instances percentage (meaning the percentage of instances |
138 |
living on offline nodes) will cause the algorithm to actively move |
139 |
instances away from offline nodes. This, coupled with the restriction |
140 |
on placement given by offline nodes, will cause evacuation of such |
141 |
nodes. |
142 |
|
143 |
On a perfectly balanced cluster (all nodes the same size, all |
144 |
instances the same size and spread across the nodes equally), all |
145 |
values would be zero. This doesn't happen too often in practice :) |
146 |
|
147 |
.SS OFFLINE INSTANCES |
148 |
|
149 |
Since current Ganeti versions do not report the memory used by offline |
150 |
(down) instances, ignoring the run status of instances will cause |
151 |
wrong calculations. For this reason, the algorithm subtracts the |
152 |
memory size of down instances from the free node memory of their |
153 |
primary node, in effect simulating the startup of such instances. |
154 |
|
155 |
.SS OTHER POSSIBLE METRICS |
156 |
|
157 |
It would be desirable to add more metrics to the algorithm, especially |
158 |
dynamically-computed metrics, such as: |
159 |
.RS 4 |
160 |
.TP 3 |
161 |
\(em |
162 |
CPU usage of instances |
163 |
.TP |
164 |
\(em |
165 |
Disk IO usage |
166 |
.TP |
167 |
\(em |
168 |
Network IO |
169 |
.RE |
170 |
|
171 |
.SH OPTIONS |
172 |
The options that can be passed to the program are as follows: |
173 |
.TP |
174 |
.B -C, --print-commands |
175 |
Print the command list at the end of the run. Without this, the |
176 |
program will only show a shorter, but cryptic output. |
177 |
.TP |
178 |
.B -p, --print-nodes |
179 |
Prints the before and after node status, in a format designed to allow |
180 |
the user to understand the node's most important parameters. |
181 |
|
182 |
The node list will contain these informations: |
183 |
.RS |
184 |
.TP |
185 |
.B F |
186 |
a character denoting the status of the node, with '-' meaning an |
187 |
offline node, '*' meaning N+1 failure and blank meaning a good node |
188 |
.TP |
189 |
.B Name |
190 |
the node name |
191 |
.TP |
192 |
.B t_mem |
193 |
the total node memory |
194 |
.TP |
195 |
.B n_mem |
196 |
the memory used by the node itself |
197 |
.TP |
198 |
.B i_mem |
199 |
the memory used by instances |
200 |
.TP |
201 |
.B x_mem |
202 |
amount memory which seems to be in use but cannot be determined why or |
203 |
by which instance; usually this means that the hypervisor has some |
204 |
overhead or that there are other reporting errors |
205 |
.TP |
206 |
.B f_mem |
207 |
the free node memory |
208 |
.TP |
209 |
.B r_mem |
210 |
the reserved node memory, which is the amount of free memory needed |
211 |
for N+1 compliance |
212 |
.TP |
213 |
.B t_dsk |
214 |
total disk |
215 |
.TP |
216 |
.B f_dsk |
217 |
free disk |
218 |
.TP |
219 |
.B pcpu |
220 |
the number of physical cpus on the node |
221 |
.TP |
222 |
.B vcpu |
223 |
the number of virtual cpus allocated to primary instances |
224 |
.TP |
225 |
.B pri |
226 |
number of primary instances |
227 |
.TP |
228 |
.B sec |
229 |
number of secondary instances |
230 |
.TP |
231 |
.B p_fmem |
232 |
percent of free memory |
233 |
.TP |
234 |
.B p_fdsk |
235 |
percent of free disk |
236 |
.TP |
237 |
.B r_cpu |
238 |
ratio of virtual to physical cpus |
239 |
.RE |
240 |
|
241 |
.TP |
242 |
.B -o, --oneline |
243 |
Only shows a one-line output from the program, designed for the case |
244 |
when one wants to look at multiple clusters at once and check their |
245 |
status. |
246 |
|
247 |
The line will contain four fields: |
248 |
.RS |
249 |
.RS 4 |
250 |
.TP 3 |
251 |
\(em |
252 |
initial cluster score |
253 |
.TP |
254 |
\(em |
255 |
number of steps in the solution |
256 |
.TP |
257 |
\(em |
258 |
final cluster score |
259 |
.TP |
260 |
\(em |
261 |
improvement in the cluster score |
262 |
.RE |
263 |
.RE |
264 |
|
265 |
.TP |
266 |
.BI "-O " name |
267 |
This option (which can be given multiple times) will mark nodes as |
268 |
being \fIoffline\fR. This means a couple of things: |
269 |
.RS |
270 |
.RS 4 |
271 |
.TP 3 |
272 |
\(em |
273 |
instances won't be placed on these nodes, not even temporarily; |
274 |
e.g. the \fIreplace primary\fR move is not available if the secondary |
275 |
node is offline, since this move requires a failover. |
276 |
.TP |
277 |
\(em |
278 |
these nodes will not be included in the score calculation (except for |
279 |
the percentage of instances on offline nodes) |
280 |
.RE |
281 |
Note that hbal will also mark as offline any nodes which are reported |
282 |
by RAPI as such, or that have "?" in file-based input in any numeric |
283 |
fields. |
284 |
.RE |
285 |
|
286 |
.TP |
287 |
.BI "-e" score ", --min-score=" score |
288 |
This parameter denotes the minimum score we are happy with and alters |
289 |
the computation in two ways: |
290 |
.RS |
291 |
.RS 4 |
292 |
.TP 3 |
293 |
\(em |
294 |
if the cluster has the initial score lower than this value, then we |
295 |
don't enter the algorithm at all, and exit with success |
296 |
.TP |
297 |
\(em |
298 |
during the iterative process, if we reach a score lower than this |
299 |
value, we exit the algorithm |
300 |
.RE |
301 |
The default value of the parameter is currently \fI1e-9\fR (chosen |
302 |
empirically). |
303 |
.RE |
304 |
|
305 |
.TP |
306 |
.BI "-n" nodefile ", --nodes=" nodefile |
307 |
The name of the file holding node information (if not collecting via |
308 |
RAPI), instead of the default \fInodes\fR file (but see below how to |
309 |
customize the default value via the environment). |
310 |
|
311 |
.TP |
312 |
.BI "-i" instancefile ", --instances=" instancefile |
313 |
The name of the file holding instance information (if not collecting |
314 |
via RAPI), instead of the default \fIinstances\fR file (but see below |
315 |
how to customize the default value via the environment). |
316 |
|
317 |
.TP |
318 |
.BI "-m" cluster |
319 |
Collect data not from files but directly from the |
320 |
.I cluster |
321 |
given as an argument via RAPI. If the argument doesn't contain a colon |
322 |
(:), then it is converted into a fully-built URL via prepending |
323 |
https:// and appending the default RAPI port, otherwise it's |
324 |
considered a fully-specified URL and is used as-is. |
325 |
|
326 |
.TP |
327 |
.BI "-L[" path "]" |
328 |
Collect data not from files but directly from the master daemon, which |
329 |
is to be contacted via the luxi (an internal Ganeti protocol). An |
330 |
optional \fIpath\fR argument is interpreted as the path to the unix |
331 |
socket on which the master daemon listens; otherwise, the default path |
332 |
used by ganeti when installed with "--localstatedir=/var" is used. |
333 |
|
334 |
.TP |
335 |
.BI "-l" N ", --max-length=" N |
336 |
Restrict the solution to this length. This can be used for example to |
337 |
automate the execution of the balancing. |
338 |
|
339 |
.TP |
340 |
.BI "--max-cpu " cpu-ratio |
341 |
The maximum virtual-to-physical cpu ratio, as a floating point number |
342 |
between zero and one. For example, specifying \fIcpu-ratio\fR as |
343 |
\fB2.5\fR means that, for a 4-cpu machine, a maximum of 10 virtual |
344 |
cpus should be allowed to be in use for primary instances. A value of |
345 |
one doesn't make sense though, as that means no disk space can be used |
346 |
on it. |
347 |
|
348 |
.TP |
349 |
.BI "--min-disk " disk-ratio |
350 |
The minimum amount of free disk space remaining, as a floating point |
351 |
number. For example, specifying \fIdisk-ratio\fR as \fB0.25\fR means |
352 |
that at least one quarter of disk space should be left free on nodes. |
353 |
|
354 |
.TP |
355 |
.B -v, --verbose |
356 |
Increase the output verbosity. Each usage of this option will increase |
357 |
the verbosity (currently more than 2 doesn't make sense) from the |
358 |
default of one. |
359 |
|
360 |
.TP |
361 |
.B -q, --quiet |
362 |
Decrease the output verbosity. Each usage of this option will decrease |
363 |
the verbosity (less than zero doesn't make sense) from the default of |
364 |
one. |
365 |
|
366 |
.TP |
367 |
.B -V, --version |
368 |
Just show the program version and exit. |
369 |
|
370 |
.SH EXIT STATUS |
371 |
|
372 |
The exist status of the command will be zero, unless for some reason |
373 |
the algorithm fatally failed (e.g. wrong node or instance data). |
374 |
|
375 |
.SH ENVIRONMENT |
376 |
|
377 |
If the variables \fBHTOOLS_NODES\fR and \fBHTOOLS_INSTANCES\fR are |
378 |
present in the environment, they will override the default names for |
379 |
the nodes and instances files. These will have of course no effect |
380 |
when RAPI is used. |
381 |
|
382 |
.SH BUGS |
383 |
|
384 |
The program does not check its input data for consistency, and aborts |
385 |
with cryptic errors messages in this case. |
386 |
|
387 |
The algorithm is not perfect. |
388 |
|
389 |
The output format is not easily scriptable, and the program should |
390 |
feed moves directly into Ganeti (either via RAPI or via a gnt-debug |
391 |
input file). |
392 |
|
393 |
.SH EXAMPLE |
394 |
|
395 |
Note that this example are not for the latest version (they don't have |
396 |
full node data). |
397 |
|
398 |
.SS Default output |
399 |
|
400 |
With the default options, the program shows each individual step and |
401 |
the improvements it brings in cluster score: |
402 |
|
403 |
.in +4n |
404 |
.nf |
405 |
.RB "$" " hbal" |
406 |
Loaded 20 nodes, 80 instances |
407 |
Cluster is not N+1 happy, continuing but no guarantee that the cluster will end N+1 happy. |
408 |
Initial score: 0.52329131 |
409 |
Trying to minimize the CV... |
410 |
1. instance14 node1:node10 => node16:node10 0.42109120 a=f r:node16 f |
411 |
2. instance54 node4:node15 => node16:node15 0.31904594 a=f r:node16 f |
412 |
3. instance4 node5:node2 => node2:node16 0.26611015 a=f r:node16 |
413 |
4. instance48 node18:node20 => node2:node18 0.21361717 a=r:node2 f |
414 |
5. instance93 node19:node18 => node16:node19 0.16166425 a=r:node16 f |
415 |
6. instance89 node3:node20 => node2:node3 0.11005629 a=r:node2 f |
416 |
7. instance5 node6:node2 => node16:node6 0.05841589 a=r:node16 f |
417 |
8. instance94 node7:node20 => node20:node16 0.00658759 a=f r:node16 |
418 |
9. instance44 node20:node2 => node2:node15 0.00438740 a=f r:node15 |
419 |
10. instance62 node14:node18 => node14:node16 0.00390087 a=r:node16 |
420 |
11. instance13 node11:node14 => node11:node16 0.00361787 a=r:node16 |
421 |
12. instance19 node10:node11 => node10:node7 0.00336636 a=r:node7 |
422 |
13. instance43 node12:node13 => node12:node1 0.00305681 a=r:node1 |
423 |
14. instance1 node1:node2 => node1:node4 0.00263124 a=r:node4 |
424 |
15. instance58 node19:node20 => node19:node17 0.00252594 a=r:node17 |
425 |
Cluster score improved from 0.52329131 to 0.00252594 |
426 |
.fi |
427 |
.in |
428 |
|
429 |
In the above output, we can see: |
430 |
- the input data (here from files) shows a cluster with 20 nodes and |
431 |
80 instances |
432 |
- the cluster is not initially N+1 compliant |
433 |
- the initial score is 0.52329131 |
434 |
|
435 |
The step list follows, showing the instance, its initial |
436 |
primary/secondary nodes, the new primary secondary, the cluster list, |
437 |
and the actions taken in this step (with 'f' denoting failover/migrate |
438 |
and 'r' denoting replace secondary). |
439 |
|
440 |
Finally, the program shows the improvement in cluster score. |
441 |
|
442 |
A more detailed output is obtained via the \fB-C\fR and \fB-p\fR options: |
443 |
|
444 |
.in +4n |
445 |
.nf |
446 |
.RB "$" " hbal" |
447 |
Loaded 20 nodes, 80 instances |
448 |
Cluster is not N+1 happy, continuing but no guarantee that the cluster will end N+1 happy. |
449 |
Initial cluster status: |
450 |
N1 Name t_mem f_mem r_mem t_dsk f_dsk pri sec p_fmem p_fdsk |
451 |
* node1 32762 1280 6000 1861 1026 5 3 0.03907 0.55179 |
452 |
node2 32762 31280 12000 1861 1026 0 8 0.95476 0.55179 |
453 |
* node3 32762 1280 6000 1861 1026 5 3 0.03907 0.55179 |
454 |
* node4 32762 1280 6000 1861 1026 5 3 0.03907 0.55179 |
455 |
* node5 32762 1280 6000 1861 978 5 5 0.03907 0.52573 |
456 |
* node6 32762 1280 6000 1861 1026 5 3 0.03907 0.55179 |
457 |
* node7 32762 1280 6000 1861 1026 5 3 0.03907 0.55179 |
458 |
node8 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
459 |
node9 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
460 |
* node10 32762 7280 12000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
461 |
node11 32762 7280 6000 1861 922 4 5 0.22221 0.49577 |
462 |
node12 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
463 |
node13 32762 7280 6000 1861 922 4 5 0.22221 0.49577 |
464 |
node14 32762 7280 6000 1861 922 4 5 0.22221 0.49577 |
465 |
* node15 32762 7280 12000 1861 1131 4 3 0.22221 0.60782 |
466 |
node16 32762 31280 0 1861 1860 0 0 0.95476 1.00000 |
467 |
node17 32762 7280 6000 1861 1106 5 3 0.22221 0.59479 |
468 |
* node18 32762 1280 6000 1396 561 5 3 0.03907 0.40239 |
469 |
* node19 32762 1280 6000 1861 1026 5 3 0.03907 0.55179 |
470 |
node20 32762 13280 12000 1861 689 3 9 0.40535 0.37068 |
471 |
|
472 |
Initial score: 0.52329131 |
473 |
Trying to minimize the CV... |
474 |
1. instance14 node1:node10 => node16:node10 0.42109120 a=f r:node16 f |
475 |
2. instance54 node4:node15 => node16:node15 0.31904594 a=f r:node16 f |
476 |
3. instance4 node5:node2 => node2:node16 0.26611015 a=f r:node16 |
477 |
4. instance48 node18:node20 => node2:node18 0.21361717 a=r:node2 f |
478 |
5. instance93 node19:node18 => node16:node19 0.16166425 a=r:node16 f |
479 |
6. instance89 node3:node20 => node2:node3 0.11005629 a=r:node2 f |
480 |
7. instance5 node6:node2 => node16:node6 0.05841589 a=r:node16 f |
481 |
8. instance94 node7:node20 => node20:node16 0.00658759 a=f r:node16 |
482 |
9. instance44 node20:node2 => node2:node15 0.00438740 a=f r:node15 |
483 |
10. instance62 node14:node18 => node14:node16 0.00390087 a=r:node16 |
484 |
11. instance13 node11:node14 => node11:node16 0.00361787 a=r:node16 |
485 |
12. instance19 node10:node11 => node10:node7 0.00336636 a=r:node7 |
486 |
13. instance43 node12:node13 => node12:node1 0.00305681 a=r:node1 |
487 |
14. instance1 node1:node2 => node1:node4 0.00263124 a=r:node4 |
488 |
15. instance58 node19:node20 => node19:node17 0.00252594 a=r:node17 |
489 |
Cluster score improved from 0.52329131 to 0.00252594 |
490 |
|
491 |
Commands to run to reach the above solution: |
492 |
echo step 1 |
493 |
echo gnt-instance migrate instance14 |
494 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance14 |
495 |
echo gnt-instance migrate instance14 |
496 |
echo step 2 |
497 |
echo gnt-instance migrate instance54 |
498 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance54 |
499 |
echo gnt-instance migrate instance54 |
500 |
echo step 3 |
501 |
echo gnt-instance migrate instance4 |
502 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance4 |
503 |
echo step 4 |
504 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node2 instance48 |
505 |
echo gnt-instance migrate instance48 |
506 |
echo step 5 |
507 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance93 |
508 |
echo gnt-instance migrate instance93 |
509 |
echo step 6 |
510 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node2 instance89 |
511 |
echo gnt-instance migrate instance89 |
512 |
echo step 7 |
513 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance5 |
514 |
echo gnt-instance migrate instance5 |
515 |
echo step 8 |
516 |
echo gnt-instance migrate instance94 |
517 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance94 |
518 |
echo step 9 |
519 |
echo gnt-instance migrate instance44 |
520 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node15 instance44 |
521 |
echo step 10 |
522 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance62 |
523 |
echo step 11 |
524 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node16 instance13 |
525 |
echo step 12 |
526 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node7 instance19 |
527 |
echo step 13 |
528 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node1 instance43 |
529 |
echo step 14 |
530 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node4 instance1 |
531 |
echo step 15 |
532 |
echo gnt-instance replace-disks -n node17 instance58 |
533 |
|
534 |
Final cluster status: |
535 |
N1 Name t_mem f_mem r_mem t_dsk f_dsk pri sec p_fmem p_fdsk |
536 |
node1 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
537 |
node2 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
538 |
node3 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
539 |
node4 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
540 |
node5 32762 7280 6000 1861 1078 4 5 0.22221 0.57947 |
541 |
node6 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
542 |
node7 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
543 |
node8 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
544 |
node9 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
545 |
node10 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
546 |
node11 32762 7280 6000 1861 1022 4 4 0.22221 0.54951 |
547 |
node12 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
548 |
node13 32762 7280 6000 1861 1022 4 4 0.22221 0.54951 |
549 |
node14 32762 7280 6000 1861 1022 4 4 0.22221 0.54951 |
550 |
node15 32762 7280 6000 1861 1031 4 4 0.22221 0.55408 |
551 |
node16 32762 7280 6000 1861 1060 4 4 0.22221 0.57007 |
552 |
node17 32762 7280 6000 1861 1006 5 4 0.22221 0.54105 |
553 |
node18 32762 7280 6000 1396 761 4 2 0.22221 0.54570 |
554 |
node19 32762 7280 6000 1861 1026 4 4 0.22221 0.55179 |
555 |
node20 32762 13280 6000 1861 1089 3 5 0.40535 0.58565 |
556 |
|
557 |
.fi |
558 |
.in |
559 |
|
560 |
Here we see, beside the step list, the initial and final cluster |
561 |
status, with the final one showing all nodes being N+1 compliant, and |
562 |
the command list to reach the final solution. In the initial listing, |
563 |
we see which nodes are not N+1 compliant. |
564 |
|
565 |
The algorithm is stable as long as each step above is fully completed, |
566 |
e.g. in step 8, both the migrate and the replace-disks are |
567 |
done. Otherwise, if only the migrate is done, the input data is |
568 |
changed in a way that the program will output a different solution |
569 |
list (but hopefully will end in the same state). |
570 |
|
571 |
.SH SEE ALSO |
572 |
.BR hspace "(1), " hscan "(1), " hail "(1), " |
573 |
.BR ganeti "(7), " gnt-instance "(8), " gnt-node "(8)" |
574 |
|
575 |
.SH "COPYRIGHT" |
576 |
.PP |
577 |
Copyright (C) 2009 Google Inc. Permission is granted to copy, |
578 |
distribute and/or modify under the terms of the GNU General Public |
579 |
License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 |
580 |
of the License, or (at your option) any later version. |
581 |
.PP |
582 |
On Debian systems, the complete text of the GNU General Public License |
583 |
can be found in /usr/share/common-licenses/GPL. |