openstack team mailing list archive

[Narayan Desai <narayan.desai@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Eoghan Glynn <eglynn@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> The harder part is that we need to be able to specify
>> independent/orthogonal quota constraints on different flavors. It
>> would be really useful to be able to say basically, you can have 2TB
>> of memory from this flavor, and 4TB of memory from that flavor. This
>> would allow saying something like "you can have up to 3 1TB instances,
>> and independently have up to 3TB of small instances as well."
>
> OK, so its the "as well" aspect that's problematic here.
>
> (If it were an either-or situation as opposed to a both, then obviously
> a combination of the instances and RAM quotas would get you part of
> the way at least).
>
> So just thinking aloud, we could potentially add new per-flavor quota
> resources so that for each existing instance-type, there was the potential
> to add a new quota limiting *only* that instance type (and maybe keep
> the existing instances quotas as an over-arching limit).
>
> For example, if the following quotas where set:
>
>   instances:          100
>   instances-m1.xlarge: 10
>   instances-m1.large:  20
>   instances-m1.small:  50
>   instances-m1.tiny:  100

<snip>

> Would that address your requirement?

I think so. If these acted as a hard limit in conjunction with
existing quota constraints, I think it would do the trick.
 -nld