openstack team mailing list archive

[Ewan Mellor <Ewan.Mellor@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Someone told The Register that Nebula's goal was 1M hosts, 60M VMs:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/10/04/ubuntu_goes_openstack/

(We don't have to stick to that, of course!)

Ewan.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: openstack-bounces+ewan.mellor=citrix.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:openstack-bounces+ewan.mellor=citrix.com@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Rick Clark
> Sent: 30 December 2010 17:42
> To: Erik Carlin
> Cc: openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [Openstack] Some insight into the number of instances Nova
> needs to spin up...
> 
> Actually it was 1M hosts and  Ivthink 45 million vms.  It was meant to
> be across all regions.  Jason Seats set the number arbitrarily, but it
> is a good target to not let us forget about scaling while we design.
> 
> I think eventually all loads will be more ephemeral.  So, I think I
> agree with your numbers, if you are talking about a single availability
> zone.
> 
> On 12/30/2010 11:25 AM, Erik Carlin wrote:
> > You are right.  The 1M number was VMs not hosts.  At least, that was
> > from one scale discussion we had within Rackspace.  I'm not sure what
> > the "official" nova target limits are and I can't find anything on
> > launchpad that defines it.  If there is something, could someone
> > please send me a link.
> >
> > I'm am certain that Google can manage more than 10K physical servers
> > per DC. Rackspace does this today.
> >
> > If I combine what I know about EC2 and Cloud Servers, I would set the
> > ROM scale targets as:
> >
> > ABSOLUTE
> > 1M VMs
> > 50K hosts
> >
> > RATE
> > 500K transactions/day (create/delete server, list servers, resize
> > server, etc. - granted, some are more expensive than others) That
> > works out to ~21K/hr but it won't be evenly distributed.  To allow
> for
> > peak, I would say something like 75K/hour or ~21/sec.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Erik
> >
> >
> > On 12/30/10 9:20 AM, "Pete Zaitcev" <zaitcev@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 29 Dec 2010 19:27:09 +0000
> >> Erik Carlin <erik.carlin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The 1M host limit still seems reasonable to me. []
> >>
> >> In my opinion, such numbers are completely out of whack. Google's
> >> Chubby article says that the busiest Chubby has 90,000 clients (not
> >> hosts!) and the biggest datacenter has 10,000 systems. They found
> >> such numbers pushing the border of unmanageable. Granted they did
> not
> >> use virtualization, but we're talking the number of boxes in both
> cases.
> >>
> >> So to reach 1M hosts in a Nova instance you have to have it manage
> >> 100 datacenters. There are going to be calls for federation of Novas
> >> long before this number is reached.
> >>
> >> Sustaining a high flap rate is a worthy goal and will have an
> >> important practical impact. And having realistic sizing ideas is
> >> going to help it.
> >>
> >> -- Pete
> >
> >
> >
> > Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message (including any attached
> or
> > embedded documents) is intended for the exclusive and confidential
> use
> > of the individual or entity to which this message is addressed, and
> > unless otherwise expressly indicated, is confidential and privileged
> information of Rackspace.
> > Any dissemination, distribution or copying of the enclosed material
> is prohibited.
> > If you receive this transmission in error, please notify us
> > immediately by e-mail at abuse@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, and delete the original
> message.
> > Your cooperation is appreciated.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> > Post to     : openstack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack
> > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>