Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

PowerVS VM provisioning: Memory, CPU and storage quotas not enforced #454

Open
1 of 3 tasks
jaywcarman opened this issue May 19, 2023 · 6 comments
Open
1 of 3 tasks
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working stale

Comments

@jaywcarman
Copy link
Member

jaywcarman commented May 19, 2023

When provisioning PowerVS VMs, memory, cpu and storage quotas are not enforced.

Most cloud providers use a Flavor to set provisioning resource allocations. The PowerVS provider sub-classes Flavor into:

The SystemType instances are used only to set the underlying host system type that the VM will be place on. None of the allocation attributes are set.

The SAPProfile instances are closer to a standard flavor, setting :cpu_total_cores and :memory.

The MIQ VM provision, reconfigure, etc. request classes use a common method to calculate memory, number_of_cpus, storage and others. They all assume that the flavor_obj will provide the allocation information necessary for automate to enforce quotas, but due to the unconventional user of flavors described here that is not working.

Initially I plan to fix just memory, since an exception is raised when automation try to multiply nil by the number of VMs requested. CPUs will be interesting since PowerVS allocates "entitled processors" (float) but also collects vCPUs in inventory (after the VM is provisioned). Storage also may need to be fixed separately, so I'll include a checklist to track progress individually:

@kbrock
Copy link
Member

kbrock commented May 30, 2023

Is is possible to change PowerVS so it sets the values rather than relying upon subclassing?

@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Sep 18, 2023

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not been updated for at least 3 months.

If you can still reproduce this issue on the current release or on master, please reply with all of the information you have about it in order to keep the issue open.

Thank you for all your contributions! More information about the ManageIQ triage process can be found in the triage process documentation.

@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Dec 25, 2023

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not been updated for at least 3 months.

If you can still reproduce this issue on the current release or on master, please reply with all of the information you have about it in order to keep the issue open.

3 similar comments
@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Apr 1, 2024

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not been updated for at least 3 months.

If you can still reproduce this issue on the current release or on master, please reply with all of the information you have about it in order to keep the issue open.

@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Jul 8, 2024

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not been updated for at least 3 months.

If you can still reproduce this issue on the current release or on master, please reply with all of the information you have about it in order to keep the issue open.

@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Oct 14, 2024

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not been updated for at least 3 months.

If you can still reproduce this issue on the current release or on master, please reply with all of the information you have about it in order to keep the issue open.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working stale
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants