cf-dev@lists.cloudfoundry.org | Placement Pools

Home Messages Hashtags Subgroups

Date Date 1 - 7 of 7

Placement Pools

Matt Cholick #1413 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# 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 attachment.html attachment.html
More All Messages By This Member
James Bayer #1414 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. toggle quoted message Show quoted text On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 8:50 AM, Matt Cholick <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# 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 attachment.html attachment.html
More All Messages By This Member
Carlo Alberto Ferraris #1492 James, Onsi, we’re also looking forward to this, for we have some peculiar infrastructure requirements. Carlo toggle quoted message Show quoted text 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 attachment.html attachment.html
More All Messages By This Member
James Bayer #1493 i believe dieu is working on this in preparate for cf summit in berlin. dieu, did i understand that correctly? On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris < cafxx(a)strayorange.com> wrote: 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> 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# 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 -- Thank you, James Bayer attachment.html attachment.html
More All Messages By This Member
Dieu Cao <dcao@...> #1496 Yes, I was just talking with Onsi and Mark Kropf about this yesterday and plan to submit a talk on this with Mark Kropf for cf summit berlin. I'll take on getting the proposal for isolation groups shared with cf-dev, hopefully, in the next couple of weeks. -Dieu CF CAPI PM toggle quoted message Show quoted text On Friday, September 4, 2015, James Bayer <jbayer(a)pivotal.io> wrote: i believe dieu is working on this in preparate for cf summit in berlin. dieu, did i understand that correctly? On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris < cafxx(a)strayorange.com> wrote: 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> 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# 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 -- Thank you, James Bayer attachment.html attachment.html
More All Messages By This Member
Noburou TANIGUCHI #1536 I'll take on getting the proposal for isolation groups shared with cf-dev, hopefully, in the next couple of weeks. Great! Is there any big change from https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GNjQwGBh0BvfAYpX0LTUYn6h4oLz7v4P9pNy0xHZtMw/edit# ? Dieu Cao wrote Yes, I was just talking with Onsi and Mark Kropf about this yesterday and plan to submit a talk on this with Mark Kropf for cf summit berlin. I'll take on getting the proposal for isolation groups shared with cf-dev, hopefully, in the next couple of weeks. -Dieu CF CAPI PM On Friday, September 4, 2015, James Bayer < jbayer@ > wrote: i believe dieu is working on this in preparate for cf summit in berlin. dieu, did i understand that correctly? On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris < cafxx@ wrote: 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@ > 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@ > 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# 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 -- Thank you, James Bayer ----- I'm not a ... noburou taniguchi -- View this message in context: http://cf-dev.70369.x6.nabble.com/cf-dev-Placement-Pools-tp1394p1521.html Sent from the CF Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More All Messages By This Member
Dieu Cao <dcao@...> #1583 Yes, there are some differences in the approach from that document. -Dieu toggle quoted message Show quoted text On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Noburou TANIGUCHI <dev(a)nota.m001.jp> wrote: I'll take on getting the proposal for isolation groups shared with cf-dev, hopefully, in the next couple of weeks. Great! Is there any big change from https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GNjQwGBh0BvfAYpX0LTUYn6h4oLz7v4P9pNy0xHZtMw/edit# ? Dieu Cao wrote Yes, I was just talking with Onsi and Mark Kropf about this yesterday and plan to submit a talk on this with Mark Kropf for cf summit berlin. I'll take on getting the proposal for isolation groups shared with cf-dev, hopefully, in the next couple of weeks. -Dieu CF CAPI PM On Friday, September 4, 2015, James Bayer < jbayer@ > wrote: i believe dieu is working on this in preparate for cf summit in berlin. dieu, did i understand that correctly? On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Carlo Alberto Ferraris < cafxx@ wrote: 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@ > 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@ > 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# 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 -- Thank you, James Bayer ----- I'm not a ... noburou taniguchi -- View this message in context: http://cf-dev.70369.x6.nabble.com/cf-dev-Placement-Pools-tp1394p1521.html Sent from the CF Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. attachment.html attachment.html
More All Messages By This Member

1 - 7 of 7

1

Previous Topic Next Topic

Home Hashtags Subgroups Terms