Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Suggestion] Launch process is slow (Initialize VDUs in parallel) #91

Open
Rizwan-Qamar opened this issue Feb 28, 2017 · 4 comments
Open
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@Rizwan-Qamar
Copy link

  1. Code is from AllocateresourceTask.java
  2. VDUs should be started in parallel (Unless they depend on each other). Each VDU should have independent initialization cycle. Failure of one VDU should not effect (abort) the initialization of other VDUs.
    for (VirtualDeploymentUnit vdu : virtualNetworkFunctionRecord.getVdu()) {
      List<Future<List<String>>> ids = new ArrayList<>();
      VimInstance vimInstance = vims.get(vdu.getId());
      if (vimInstance == null) {
        throw new NullPointerException(
            "Our algorithms are too complex, even for us, this is what abnormal IQ means :" + "(");
      }
      vimInstance = vimRepository.findFirstById(vimInstance.getId());
      log.debug(
          "Allocating VDU: "
              + vdu.getName()
              + " to vim instance: "
              + vimInstance.getName()
              + " - id: "
              + vimInstance.getId());
      for (NFVImage image : vimInstance.getImages()) {
        log.trace("Available image name: " + image.getName());
      }
      ids.add(
          resourceManagement.allocate(
              vdu, virtualNetworkFunctionRecord, vimInstance, userData, keys));

      for (Future<List<String>> id : ids) {
        id.get();
      }
    }
@lorenzotomasini lorenzotomasini self-assigned this Mar 6, 2017
@lorenzotomasini lorenzotomasini added this to the 3.1.1 milestone Mar 6, 2017
@lorenzotomasini
Copy link
Member

Hi,

I would like to change the content of this issue by splitting in two different.

  1. allocate vdu in parallel
  2. put vnfr to error if one / all vdu fail

so i will close this issue with regards to point 1 and i will open another one for what concerns point 2

if this ok?
@mpauls ?

@mpauls
Copy link
Member

mpauls commented Mar 6, 2017

sounds fair

@lorenzotomasini
Copy link
Member

opened new one, @Rizwan-Qamar please follow the new one (#101). I will close this.

@lorenzotomasini
Copy link
Member

The fix was not working, need to reopen the enhancement

@lorenzotomasini lorenzotomasini modified the milestones: 4.0.0, 3.2.1 Mar 8, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants