Re: Placement Pools


Carlo Alberto Ferraris
 

James, Onsi,
we’re also looking forward to this, for we have some peculiar infrastructure requirements.

Carlo

On Aug 29, 2015, at 2:51 AM, James Bayer <jbayer(a)pivotal.io> wrote:

we've been using a new term for the same concept we've previously labeled placement pools called "isolation groups".

onsi has been working on some documentation for what this may look like and the requirements, but the work has not started. i believe onsi will share something soon.

so today, the way to accomplish this need to place apps on specific infrastructure is to use separate CF installations.

On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Matt Cholick <cholick(a)gmail.com <mailto:cholick(a)gmail.com>> wrote:
More than a year ago, there was some discussion and a proposal around adding placement pools so cloud foundry admins could better target how applications were placed on runners:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GNjQwGBh0BvfAYpX0LTUYn6h4oLz7v4P9pNy0xHZtMw/edit# <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GNjQwGBh0BvfAYpX0LTUYn6h4oLz7v4P9pNy0xHZtMw/edit#>

Did this work gain traction? I've looked through the release notes as well as MEGA and CF Diego's public trackers and don't see stories for this work either done or planned, though it could also be that I'm just not finding it.

My goal is to place canary apps in specifically Z1 or Z2, as well as place some internally used apps that, for networking reasons, should be in one zone or the other.

-Matt Cholick




--
Thank you,

James Bayer

Join cf-dev@lists.cloudfoundry.org to automatically receive all group messages.