| Summary: | 6.8.7. Idling and Overcommitment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | OpenShift Container Platform | Reporter: | Luke Meyer <lmeyer> |
| Component: | Documentation | Assignee: | brice <bfallonf> |
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | ecs-bugs |
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 2.0.0 | CC: | alyoung, jokerman, libra-onpremise-devel, lmeyer, mmccomas |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2014-01-06 05:18:45 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
Luke Meyer
2013-12-17 22:56:26 UTC
I forgot: oo-last-access doesn't count access coming from the node itself. So where I said "oo-last-access compiles the last access time for each gear from web front-end logs." I should have said "oo-last-access compiles the last access time for each gear from web front-end logs, excluding any access originating from the same node the gear is on." Luke, I took all this in and rewrote the Automatic topic, commented out the old Manual topic, and added a new Manual topic, as well as put the Automatic topic on top. It'd be too hard to copy/paste the changes into here. I'll let you see them for yourself :) Hope it's all up to scratch. Let me know if you'd like me to change anything. Looks pretty good, but I'm finding the flow a bit odd now that I look at it. To me, the logical progression would be from manual to automatic. Also, oddjobd isn't technically required when manually idling. What it's for is allowing automatic un-idling - starting the gear automatically when someone accesses the web app. So the description isn't quite right, and I'd say it probably makes more sense to talk about it after the manual basics. So here's what I suggest: 1. Move "Manually Idling a Gear" before "Automated Gear Idling". 2. Move the entire part about oddjobd beginning with "Idling a gear requires oddjobd" to a new section about automatic un-idling something like: --- Automatically Restoring Idle Gears Web access restores an idle gear via the oddjobd service, which is a local message bus. When idling gears, ensure the oddjobd service is available and is running so that they become available again when a web request is made: # chkconfig messagebus on # service messagebus start # chkconfig oddjobd on # service oddjobd start --- 3. This line seems kind of unnecessary: "If more complicated idling criteria are desired than what the oo-auto-idler command provides, copy and modify the criteria to incorporate any business logic as a custom script." I'm pretty sure I wrote that originally, but now it seems like odd advice in a manual to tell people to modify what they want to. If they've read through this and they're so inclined, they will see what they need to do. I'd vote to remove it. BTW, this should probably be a separate bug, but I thought I'd note... The admin guide description of the idler tools is now totally out of date https://access.redhat.com/site/documentation/en-US/OpenShift_Enterprise/2/html-single/Administration_Guide/index.html#sect-Idler_Commands oo-last-access and oo-auto-idler being the only ones left I think. 1. Done. 2. Done, with a little rewording. 3. Done. To be honest, I didn't understand why that was there anyway :P As for the stuff in the Admin Guide, is it as easy as deleting the sections that aren't oo-last-access and oo-auto-idler? That can easily be done. (In reply to brice from comment #7) > As for the stuff in the Admin Guide, is it as easy as deleting the sections > that aren't oo-last-access and oo-auto-idler? That can easily be done. Delete those and rename oo-autoidler => oo-auto-idler There are some other things but they can wait. Thanks! Ok. Created another bug with that info. I assigned myself and put you in as a CC recipient. And thanks for all that, putting this bug onto QA. |