Bug 1004725

Summary:	[origin_ui_58] The suggestion did not show clearly need to delete node from which district
Product:	OKD	Reporter:	zhaozhanqi <zzhao>
Component:	Website	Assignee:	Luke Meyer <lmeyer>
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:	libra bugs <libra-bugs>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	2.x	CC:	xtian
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	All
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2014-07-11 18:37:24 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:

Description zhaozhanqi 2013-09-05 11:06:19 UTC

Description of problem:
when one district available active gears are greater than 'GEAR_DOWN_THRESHOLD', the suggestion will show 'Excess capacity in gear profile small', but it did not say to need to remove node from which one district. 

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
fork_ami_origin_ui_81_821

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. create one small district and add two nodes to it
2. set 'GEAR_DOWN_THRESHOLD=2000, small: 170'
3. login on admin-console-->suggestions

Actual results:

Excess capacity in gear profile small
Remove 1 node to reclaim excess capacity.

You currently have 179 active gears available, which exceeds the configured GEAR_DOWN_THRESHOLD of 170. The maximum number of active gears for nodes in this gear profile is 90, so removing 1 node will bring the available active gears below the threshold.

At this time, specifying which node to remove is difficult to automate robustly. Generally, it is a good idea to remove nodes that are not districted, nodes that are deactivated in their districts, and nodes that have the fewest gears to move.

Expected results:

should point out: need to remove node from which one distirct.

Additional info:

Comment 1 Luke Meyer 2013-09-05 13:06:02 UTC

You're right, that would be ideal. I didn't implement this yet, because the complexity didn't seem to be warranted for such an uncommon case. I'll keep this bug around to remind me, but it's just not a high priority.

Comment 3 Luke Meyer 2014-07-11 18:37:24 UTC

Realistically this is not enough of a priority to fix before 3.0, at which point the admin console will receive a radical makeover anyway.