Customizing for One-Off deployments

[admin]

Were currently evaluating View4 and been having some decent success. However there is one thing that has me a little stumped which must be simple. I have an existing pool which is thin-provisioned with composer. I want to add a new desktop to the pool but create an informative unique display name (username-vm)

in vcentre instead of following the standard naming convention originally setup but it seems i have to increment the number of vm's in the pool by 1 each time you want to add a vm. If someone makes a mistake when incrementing that number, for instance say it was 13 and you have to enter 14 to create a new vm but enter 11 by mistake, it removes 2 vm's from the pool - even if they are in use by someone.

I am trying to use this pool method vs. one off creations in order to utilize the thin provisioning functionality of composer.

Is there something glaringly obvious I am missing here? am I going about it the wrong way?

[admin]

Anyone?

[admin]

Nobody is able to provide any sort of thought or suggestion on this? I cant believe I am the only one with this concern or question?

[HenryCai]

Frankly speaking, I think this is more like a user error.

First, the current pool size will be shown when you edit the size of the pool, soif you want to add more VMs you should always a larger number than current number.

Second, it is not possible to predict users behavior when it comes situations like this. How would the server know that a user wants to increaze or decrease the size of the pool?

Points needed, if you think I am helpful:P

[admin]

I appreciate you taking the time to reply Henry but Im not sure if you fully understand the severity of such an easy to make mistake. If you wanted to increment the pool size by 1, it requires you to completly re-enter the entire pool count. If you had 68 machines and wanted to increment by one, you have to remove the 8 and put a 9 or remove the entire field and put 69. Say you removed the entire field and put 59 by mistake. You just wiped out 10 vm's. Why is there not an an independent field for incrementing the pool count without the risk of accidently deleting vm's from the pool? Every other product has it.

You have to understand my concern here. We are looking at deploying the technology to virtualuize about 450 pc's. This means we want to take advantage of pools and the thin provisioning technology but also want to allocate the day to day provisioning respobnsbilities to our helpdesk staff. Although we can stress the importance and critically of such a mistake, the sense of responsibility and ownership is not always there and as such I can easily see complatency becoming an issue and mistakes being made.

I cant believe for large size environments I am the only one with this concern. Its possible there are other ways to handle this I havent discovered, but it seems like a bit of an oversight. I can see the value when creating a fixed set of vm's for a bunch of new hires, or a lab or test project but not when adding new vm's daily.

[HenryCai]

Hey Scott,

I understand your concern now, and I agree that it is possible to make such mistake and the outcome can be very bad.

I will forward your concern to corresponding team

Points needed, if you think I am helpful:P