Nested Resource Pools: Effective?

[kellino]

I'm writing this under extreme sleep depravation so please forgive any bad grammar, etc.

I have this idea in my head that nested resource pools have no effect and I'm just trying to validate or disprove this.

Say for example, that at the root you create a resource pools with "High" for shares value. Then imagine that within this pool there are sub-pools with shares of Low, Normal and High.

Doe these sub-pools kinda of just cancel out the orignal shares value or do they have no effect at all?

I'm thinking that nested resource pools aren't effective, but I don't trust any of my thinking right now and just wanted to validate while I had this idea. Thanks!

[admin]

Nested resource pools do indeed have an effect. However, as with all resource controls except limits, this effect only takes effect if there is resource contention. And now, the shares values on the nested pools do not cancel out the values of the parent RP. All of these values have a cumulative effect.

This is how it works:

Your top "high" resource pool gets allocated resources based on this setting of "high" and the aggregated resource demand of all of the VMs in this resource pool and in any of its descendant resource pools. Then this amount of resources gets divided up among the 3 child resource pools based on each of their share settings and aggregate demand. Everything is relative to the amount of resources allocated to your parent resource pool.

hope this helps.