Bug 1594196

Summary: [v2v][RFE] Ability to limit the number of concurrent migrations (throttling)
Product: Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine Reporter: Marco Berube <mberube>
Component: V2VAssignee: Marco Berube <mberube>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Yadnyawalk Tale <ytale>
Severity: high Docs Contact: Red Hat CloudForms Documentation <cloudforms-docs>
Priority: medium    
Version: 5.10.0CC: bthurber, dagur, fdupont, hkataria, lavenel, mfeifer, mpovolny, obarenbo, simaishi, smallamp
Target Milestone: GAKeywords: FutureFeature
Target Release: 5.10.0   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard: v2v
Fixed In Version: 5.10.0.19 Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2019-02-07 23:03:14 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: V2V Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1601090    
Attachments:
Description Flags
fixed_proof.png none

Description Marco Berube 2018-06-22 11:20:08 UTC
Description of problem:


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


How reproducible:


Steps to Reproduce:
1.
2.
3.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 2 Daniel Gur 2018-07-02 14:03:35 UTC
Will it indeed be part of Sprint 10 which is now aimed for 5.9.4 v2v GA, or 5.10, without this we are actually limiting the migration plan size.

Comment 4 Loic Avenel 2018-08-02 13:56:33 UTC
*** Bug 1592768 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 5 Sudhir Mallamprabhakara 2018-08-08 14:29:27 UTC
*** Bug 1613848 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 7 Yadnyawalk Tale 2018-10-03 14:28:40 UTC
@Fabien, any thoughts on how to test this thing?

Comment 8 Fabien Dupont 2018-10-03 14:47:49 UTC
Well, this is refactoring of the existing throttling feature that limits the number of concurrent migrations per conversion host and/or per provider. So, the test is to ensure that there is no regression.

Comment 9 Fabien Dupont 2018-10-03 16:54:11 UTC
A bug has been found and a PR has been submitted:
https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq-content/pull/439

Comment 10 CFME Bot 2018-10-05 16:02:32 UTC
New commit detected on ManageIQ/manageiq-content/hammer:

https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq-content/commit/e130743043012631bcd4f0bc26ef41a9103f5115
commit e130743043012631bcd4f0bc26ef41a9103f5115
Author:     Greg McCullough <gmccullo>
AuthorDate: Thu Oct  4 16:47:07 2018 -0400
Commit:     Greg McCullough <gmccullo>
CommitDate: Thu Oct  4 16:47:07 2018 -0400

    Merge pull request #439 from fdupont-redhat/v2v_fix_admin_userid_in_throttler_launch

    Fix userid in transformation throttler launch

    (cherry picked from commit 5688461f40a7e4a0b1f507202b910e8a0ffbea5b)

    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1594196

 content/automate/ManageIQ/Transformation/TransformationThrottler.class/__methods__/utils.rb | 2 +-
 spec/content/automate/ManageIQ/Transformation/TransformationThrottler.class/__methods__/utils_spec.rb | 3 +-
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

Comment 11 Yadnyawalk Tale 2018-12-05 12:26:20 UTC
Created attachment 1511660 [details]
fixed_proof.png

I have checked by setting concurrent migration limit with UI as well as from rail console separately, both works. When I set limit to 2 and run 3 plans with single-single vm, it just start first two and third plan waits in Pre-migration state which is what we have expected. I can also seen transformation/transformationthrottler/watch in automate.log while running through mentioned wait period.

Verified on - 5.10.0.27.20181128170555_43ed8cb

Comment 12 Daniel Gur 2018-12-05 14:39:13 UTC
What was the implementation enhancement here from the v1?
The algorithm is now checking and picking the Conversion host according to the existing CPU and memory load on the host?

Comment 13 Fabien Dupont 2018-12-05 14:41:39 UTC
@daniel, nope, still not. But we moved the conversion host code to backend and there's no regression. It's not an enhancement per se.

Comment 14 errata-xmlrpc 2019-02-07 23:03:14 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2019:0212