From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 187131FF13C for ; Thu, 02 Apr 2026 15:07:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 734F61969F; Thu, 2 Apr 2026 15:08:28 +0200 (CEST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2026 15:07:54 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH cluster v4 03/28] datacenter config: add auto rebalancing options From: "Dominik Rusovac" To: "Daniel Kral" , X-Mailer: aerc 0.20.0 References: <20260402124817.416232-1-d.kral@proxmox.com> <20260402124817.416232-4-d.kral@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <20260402124817.416232-4-d.kral@proxmox.com> X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1775135216343 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -1.017 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 1 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 1 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 1 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: L4X6YVY272Z2FY7WFTZJ2CFFUEIDMISX X-Message-ID-Hash: L4X6YVY272Z2FY7WFTZJ2CFFUEIDMISX X-MailFrom: d.rusovac@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: lgtm, consider this On Thu Apr 2, 2026 at 2:43 PM CEST, Daniel Kral wrote: > These options control the behavior of the load balancing system in the > HA Manager. > > The imbalance threshold default value is set to `0.3`, as > experimentation with some common cluster sizes showed good results. This > might need more adaption in the future, such as a cluster-size-dependent > profile setting to find a better threshold default value. +1 > > Another inbalance threshold default value, which was considered, was > `0.15`, which is the minimum threshold to detect an imbalance in a > cluster with one node with load 0.0 and the other nodes with load 1.0 > for a cluster size of up to 45 nodes. For cluster size N, this is > derived with: > > node_loads =3D [0.0] + [1.0 for _ in range(N-1)] > min_imbalance =3D calculate_node_imbalance(node_loads) > > Though a good starting metric, the imbalance threshold of `0.15` would > be too sensitive for small cluster sizes and `0.3` was a better balance > for that. > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Kral > --- > changes v3 -> v4: > - change threshold default value from 0.7 to 0.3 > - add minimum requirements to number fields > [snip] Reviewed-by: Dominik Rusovac