Review Request: fix for CLOUDSTACK-2347: Zone filter for listSnapshots API

[Harikrishna Patnala]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11820/
---

Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Prateek, Nitin Mehta, and Koushik Das.


Description
---

CLOUDSTACK-2347:  Zone filter for listSnapshots API 

Added new optional parameter zone id in listSnapshots API which allows to list 
snapshots with additional criteria.


This addresses bug CLOUDSTACK-2347.


Diffs
-

  api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/user/snapshot/ListSnapshotsCmd.java 
d7e6bc8 
  api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/SnapshotResponse.java 7484ac9 
  server/src/com/cloud/api/ApiResponseHelper.java 0c98abc 
  server/src/com/cloud/storage/snapshot/SnapshotManagerImpl.java 92d80ee 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11820/diff/


Testing
---

Tested locally


Thanks,

Harikrishna Patnala

RE: Test halting build every now and then

[Daan Hoogland]

H Mike,

I had this too, working from my home machine and got some hint on this list, 
stating a wireless interface on your machine might be the problem. I haven't 
been able to pinpoint the culprit yet. What is your setup?

Regards,
Daan Hoogland

-Original Message-
From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com] 
Sent: woensdag 12 juni 2013 1:19
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Test halting build every now and then

Took five tries to get the build over this hump a moment ago.

Any thoughts on what's going on there?

Thanks!


On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Mike Tutkowski < mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Does anyone know if there is a way to stop the build from (very often) 
> halting here indefinitely?
>
> 2013-06-04 12:19:47,836 INFO  [utils.net.NetUtilsTest] (main:) IP is 
> 1234:5678::dd3b:e82c:ce6b:fe5c
> 2013-06-04 12:19:47,839 INFO  [utils.net.NetUtilsTest] (main:) IP is 
> 1234:5678::814a:9955:e8e2:84f Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, 
> Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.085 sec Running 
> com.cloud.utils.StringUtilsTest Tests run: 10, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, 
> Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.011 sec Running 
> com.cloud.utils.testcase.NioTest
> 2013-06-04 12:19:47,860 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Test
> 2013-06-04 12:19:47,913 INFO  [utils.nio.NioServer]
> (NioTestServer-Selector:) NioConnection started and listening on
> 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:
>
> I usually just wait for this point in the build and if it halts, then 
> I CTRL-C and try again.
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> *Mike Tutkowski*
> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the 
> cloud
> *(tm)*
>



--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud
*(tm)*

RE: Contributing as a non-committer

[Daan Hoogland]

Don't you speak smtp, then?

-Original Message-
From: Mathias Mullins [mailto:mathias.mull...@citrix.com] 
Sent: woensdag 12 juni 2013 4:08
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Contributing as a non-committer

Ok, Alex and I'Ll start e-mailing you through Elm too! :-)

Matt 



On 6/10/13 11:03 PM, "Alex Huang"  wrote:

>> Forget about eclipse for now :) just use vi :)
>
>Why don't we just go back to ed?
>
>--Alex

Re: Review Request: fix for CLOUDSTACK-2347: Zone filter for listSnapshots API

[Nitin Mehta]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11820/#review21783
---

Ship it!


Ship It!

- Nitin Mehta


On June 12, 2013, 7:12 a.m., Harikrishna Patnala wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11820/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 12, 2013, 7:12 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Prateek, Nitin Mehta, and Koushik 
> Das.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> CLOUDSTACK-2347:  Zone filter for listSnapshots API 
> 
> Added new optional parameter zone id in listSnapshots API which allows to 
> list snapshots with additional criteria.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug CLOUDSTACK-2347.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   
> api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/user/snapshot/ListSnapshotsCmd.java 
> d7e6bc8 
>   api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/SnapshotResponse.java 7484ac9 
>   server/src/com/cloud/api/ApiResponseHelper.java 0c98abc 
>   server/src/com/cloud/storage/snapshot/SnapshotManagerImpl.java 92d80ee 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11820/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> Tested locally
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Harikrishna Patnala
> 
>

Re: Review Request: fix for CLOUDSTACK-2347: Zone filter for listSnapshots API

[ASF Subversion and Git Services]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11820/#review21784
---


Commit 215b638e8eb22fd433ebdc396d4b7a38b0f6796a in branch refs/heads/master 
from Harikrishna Patnala
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;h=215b638 ]

CLOUDSTACK-2347:  Zone filter for listSnapshots API

Added new optional parameter zone id in listSnapshots API which allows to list 
snapshots with additional criteria.
   Signed off by :- Nitin Mehta 


- ASF Subversion and Git Services


On June 12, 2013, 7:12 a.m., Harikrishna Patnala wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11820/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 12, 2013, 7:12 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Prateek, Nitin Mehta, and Koushik 
> Das.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> CLOUDSTACK-2347:  Zone filter for listSnapshots API 
> 
> Added new optional parameter zone id in listSnapshots API which allows to 
> list snapshots with additional criteria.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug CLOUDSTACK-2347.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   
> api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/user/snapshot/ListSnapshotsCmd.java 
> d7e6bc8 
>   api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/SnapshotResponse.java 7484ac9 
>   server/src/com/cloud/api/ApiResponseHelper.java 0c98abc 
>   server/src/com/cloud/storage/snapshot/SnapshotManagerImpl.java 92d80ee 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11820/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> Tested locally
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Harikrishna Patnala
> 
>

Chip and David elected ASF Members

[Sebastien Goasguen]

Congratulations to Chip and David for being elected members of the ASF:

https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_welcomes2

-Sebastien

Re: Chip and David elected ASF Members

[Mohammad Nour El-Din]

Congrats ;)


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:

> Congratulations to Chip and David for being elected members of the ASF:
>
>
> https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_welcomes2
>
> -Sebastien




-- 
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour

"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
- Albert Einstein

Re: Review Request: (CLOUDSTACK-1301) VM Disk I/O Throttling

[Wei Zhou]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11782/
---

(Updated June 12, 2013, 9:13 a.m.)


Review request for cloudstack, Wido den Hollander and John Burwell.


Changes
---

According to Wido's comments
(1) remove unused lines.
(2) replace "virsh version" command with conn.getVersion/getLibvirVersion
(3) replace tab with space


Description
---

The patch for VM Disk I/O throttling based on commit 
3f3c6aa35f64c4129c203d54840524e6aa2c4621


This addresses bug CLOUDSTACK-1301.


Diffs (updated)
-

  api/src/com/cloud/agent/api/to/VolumeTO.java 4cbe82b 
  api/src/com/cloud/offering/DiskOffering.java dd77c70 
  api/src/com/cloud/vm/DiskProfile.java e3a3386 
  api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/ApiConstants.java ab1402c 
  
api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/offering/CreateDiskOfferingCmd.java
 aa11599 
  
api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/offering/CreateServiceOfferingCmd.java
 4c54a4e 
  api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/DiskOfferingResponse.java 377e66e 
  api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/ServiceOfferingResponse.java 
31533f8 
  api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/VolumeResponse.java 21d7d1a 
  client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages.properties 2b17359 
  core/src/com/cloud/agent/api/AttachVolumeCommand.java 302b8f8 
  engine/schema/src/com/cloud/storage/DiskOfferingVO.java 909d7fe 
  
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java
 bab53bc 
  
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtDomainXMLParser.java
 b8645e1 
  
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtVMDef.java 
9cddb2e 
  server/src/com/cloud/api/query/dao/DiskOfferingJoinDaoImpl.java 283181f 
  server/src/com/cloud/api/query/dao/ServiceOfferingJoinDaoImpl.java 56e4d0a 
  server/src/com/cloud/api/query/dao/VolumeJoinDaoImpl.java e27e2d9 
  server/src/com/cloud/api/query/vo/DiskOfferingJoinVO.java 6d3cdcb 
  server/src/com/cloud/api/query/vo/ServiceOfferingJoinVO.java e87a101 
  server/src/com/cloud/api/query/vo/VolumeJoinVO.java 6ef8c91 
  server/src/com/cloud/configuration/Config.java 5ee0fad 
  server/src/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManager.java 8db037b 
  server/src/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManagerImpl.java 59e70cf 
  server/src/com/cloud/storage/StorageManager.java d49a7f8 
  server/src/com/cloud/storage/StorageManagerImpl.java d38b35e 
  server/src/com/cloud/storage/VolumeManagerImpl.java 43f3681 
  server/src/com/cloud/test/DatabaseConfig.java 70c8178 
  server/test/com/cloud/vpc/MockConfigurationManagerImpl.java 21b3590 
  setup/db/db/schema-410to420.sql bcfbcc9 
  ui/dictionary.jsp a5f0662 
  ui/scripts/configuration.js cb15598 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11782/diff/


Testing
---

testing ok.


Thanks,

Wei Zhou

Re: Review Request: Fix for CLOUDSTACK-1622, CLOUDSTACK-1704

[Abhinandan Prateek]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11780/#review21785
---

Ship it!


Ship It!

- Abhinandan Prateek


On June 10, 2013, 5:19 p.m., Harikrishna Patnala wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11780/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 10, 2013, 5:19 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Prateek and Nitin Mehta.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> Global parameter "cluster.memory.allocated.capacity.disablethreshold" and 
> "cluster.cpu.allocated.capacity.disablethreshold" are not disabling cluster 
> after threshold values.
> 
> This is due to unhandled sql query when these parameters have null values in 
> the DB. Fixed by adding that case in the query.
> 
> 
> This addresses bugs CLOUDSTACK-1622 and CLOUDSTACK-1704.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   engine/schema/src/com/cloud/capacity/dao/CapacityDaoImpl.java 0b9ff1a 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11780/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> Tested locally
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Harikrishna Patnala
> 
>

Re: Review Request: Fix for CLOUDSTACK-1622, CLOUDSTACK-1704

[ASF Subversion and Git Services]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11780/#review21786
---


Commit a30f9fa64a49acfe7d3ac57f2ef9d890473f48c4 in branch refs/heads/master 
from Harikrishna Patnala
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;h=a30f9fa ]

Fix for CLOUDSTACK-1704 and CLOUDSTACK-1622

Signed-off-by: Abhinandan Prateek 


- ASF Subversion and Git Services


On June 10, 2013, 5:19 p.m., Harikrishna Patnala wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11780/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 10, 2013, 5:19 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Prateek and Nitin Mehta.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> Global parameter "cluster.memory.allocated.capacity.disablethreshold" and 
> "cluster.cpu.allocated.capacity.disablethreshold" are not disabling cluster 
> after threshold values.
> 
> This is due to unhandled sql query when these parameters have null values in 
> the DB. Fixed by adding that case in the query.
> 
> 
> This addresses bugs CLOUDSTACK-1622 and CLOUDSTACK-1704.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   engine/schema/src/com/cloud/capacity/dao/CapacityDaoImpl.java 0b9ff1a 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11780/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> Tested locally
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Harikrishna Patnala
> 
>

Re: Review Request: Fix for CLOUDSTACK-1622, CLOUDSTACK-1704

[ASF Subversion and Git Services]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11780/#review21787
---


Commit a30f9fa64a49acfe7d3ac57f2ef9d890473f48c4 in branch refs/heads/master 
from Harikrishna Patnala
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;h=a30f9fa ]

Fix for CLOUDSTACK-1704 and CLOUDSTACK-1622

Signed-off-by: Abhinandan Prateek 


- ASF Subversion and Git Services


On June 10, 2013, 5:19 p.m., Harikrishna Patnala wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11780/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 10, 2013, 5:19 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Prateek and Nitin Mehta.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> Global parameter "cluster.memory.allocated.capacity.disablethreshold" and 
> "cluster.cpu.allocated.capacity.disablethreshold" are not disabling cluster 
> after threshold values.
> 
> This is due to unhandled sql query when these parameters have null values in 
> the DB. Fixed by adding that case in the query.
> 
> 
> This addresses bugs CLOUDSTACK-1622 and CLOUDSTACK-1704.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   engine/schema/src/com/cloud/capacity/dao/CapacityDaoImpl.java 0b9ff1a 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11780/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> Tested locally
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Harikrishna Patnala
> 
>

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-2642 : [XenServer] Add support for XenServer 6.2.0

[Abhinandan Prateek]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11341/#review21788
---

Ship it!


Ship It!

- Abhinandan Prateek


On May 23, 2013, 9:45 a.m., venkata swamy babu  budumuru wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11341/
> ---
> 
> (Updated May 23, 2013, 9:45 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack and Abhinandan Prateek.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> Steps to reproduce : 
> 
> 1. Have a CloudStack 4.2 setup 
> 2. Try to create an advanced zone using the XenServer 6.2.0 
> 
> Observations : 
> 
> (i) Adding host fails because XcpDiscoverer.java is currently allowing only 
> till XenServer 6.1.0 release. 
> 
> 
> This addresses bug CLOUDSTACK-2642.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   
> plugins/hypervisors/xen/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/xen/discoverer/XcpServerDiscoverer.java
>  fd49836 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11341/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> With the above mentioned fix, tried to add the XenServer 6.2 build and it 
> went fine without any issues.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> venkata swamy babu  budumuru
> 
>

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-2642 : [XenServer] Add support for XenServer 6.2.0

[ASF Subversion and Git Services]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11341/#review21790
---


Commit fe506d9b68395358457b17bd5788ed6cfbe589b7 in branch refs/heads/master 
from venkataswamybabu budumuru
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;h=fe506d9 ]

CLOUDSTACK-2642: [XenServer] Add support for XenServer 6.2.0

Currently XcpServerDiscoverer.java is only allowing till XenServer 6.1.0. Added
code to support XenServer 6.2.0. Also, added support to allow the RC build
of XenSever 6.2.0.

Signed-off-by: venkataswamybabu budumuru 
Signed-off-by: Abhinandan Prateek 


- ASF Subversion and Git Services


On May 23, 2013, 9:45 a.m., venkata swamy babu  budumuru wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11341/
> ---
> 
> (Updated May 23, 2013, 9:45 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack and Abhinandan Prateek.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> Steps to reproduce : 
> 
> 1. Have a CloudStack 4.2 setup 
> 2. Try to create an advanced zone using the XenServer 6.2.0 
> 
> Observations : 
> 
> (i) Adding host fails because XcpDiscoverer.java is currently allowing only 
> till XenServer 6.1.0 release. 
> 
> 
> This addresses bug CLOUDSTACK-2642.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   
> plugins/hypervisors/xen/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/xen/discoverer/XcpServerDiscoverer.java
>  fd49836 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11341/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> With the above mentioned fix, tried to add the XenServer 6.2 build and it 
> went fine without any issues.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> venkata swamy babu  budumuru
> 
>

Re: Review Request: fixed not showing uuid of ip address id and network in list firewall and list egress firewall rules response

[Jayapal Reddy]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11803/
---

(Updated June 12, 2013, 9:46 a.m.)


Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Prateek and Murali Reddy.


Description
---

showing uuid of ip address id in list firewall rules response
showing uuid of network id of in list egress firewall rules response


This addresses bug cloudstack-2934.


Diffs
-

  api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/FirewallResponse.java 26d2433 
  server/src/com/cloud/api/ApiResponseHelper.java 0c98abc 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11803/diff/


Testing
---

Tested listFirewallRules and listEgressFirewallRules API responses


Thanks,

Jayapal Reddy

Re: Review Request: Cloudstack-2621 [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Failed to delete guest IP range from a new subnet/C

[bharat kumar]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11435/
---

(Updated June 12, 2013, 10:28 a.m.)


Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Prateek and Koushik Das.


Description
---

[Multiple_IP_Ranges] Failed to delete guest IP range from a new subnet/C
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2621


This addresses bug Cloudstack-2621.


Diffs (updated)
-

  server/src/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManagerImpl.java 59e70cf 
  server/src/com/cloud/network/router/VirtualNetworkApplianceManagerImpl.java 
db4786a 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11435/diff/


Testing
---

tested on master.


Thanks,

bharat kumar

Re: Chip and David elected ASF Members

[Ahmad Emneina]

Rightly earned... Congrats guys.

Ahmad

On Jun 12, 2013, at 1:31 AM, Sebastien Goasguen  wrote:

> Congratulations to Chip and David for being elected members of the ASF:
> 
> https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_welcomes2
> 
> -Sebastien

Re: Review Request: Cloudstack-2621 [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Failed to delete guest IP range from a new subnet/C

[bharat kumar]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11435/
---

(Updated June 12, 2013, 10:59 a.m.)


Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Prateek and Koushik Das.


Description
---

[Multiple_IP_Ranges] Failed to delete guest IP range from a new subnet/C
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2621


This addresses bug Cloudstack-2621.


Diffs (updated)
-

  server/src/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManagerImpl.java 59e70cf 
  server/src/com/cloud/network/router/VirtualNetworkApplianceManagerImpl.java 
db4786a 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11435/diff/


Testing
---

tested on master.


Thanks,

bharat kumar

Re: Chip and David elected ASF Members

[Wei ZHOU]

Congratulations!


2013/6/12 Sebastien Goasguen 

> Congratulations to Chip and David for being elected members of the ASF:
>
>
> https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_welcomes2
>
> -Sebastien

Re: Chip and David elected ASF Members

[Go Chiba]

Congrats guys :)


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:

> Congratulations to Chip and David for being elected members of the ASF:
>
>
> https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_welcomes2
>
> -Sebastien

RE: Chip and David elected ASF Members

[Radhika Puthiyetath]

Well deserved. Congratulations to Chip and David.

-Original Message-
From: Sebastien Goasguen [mailto:run...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:01 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Chip and David elected ASF Members

Congratulations to Chip and David for being elected members of the ASF:

https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_welcomes2

-Sebastien

Re: Chip and David elected ASF Members

[Abhinandan Prateek]

Congratulations Chip and David !

On 12/06/13 2:01 PM, "Sebastien Goasguen"  wrote:

>Congratulations to Chip and David for being elected members of the ASF:
>
>https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_w
>elcomes2
>
>-Sebastien

[Discuss][Proposal] Configurable option for egress firewall rules default policy

[Jayapal Reddy Uradi]

Hi,

The current egress firewall rule feature by default BLOCK the all the outgoing 
traffic if there are no user configured rules.

I am proposing configurable option for the egress firewall rules using the 
Network offering.
In network offering for firewall service provider, user can select egress 
default policy to allow/deny.

Here is bug# https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1578

Please find below FS.

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Egress+firewall+rules+-+Ability+to+change+the+default

Please provide your comments.

Thanks,
Jayapal  

Re: Review Request: Cloudstack-2621 [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Failed to delete guest IP range from a new subnet/C

[Koushik Das]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11435/#review21791
---

Ship it!


Ship It!

- Koushik Das


On June 12, 2013, 10:59 a.m., bharat kumar wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11435/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 12, 2013, 10:59 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Prateek and Koushik Das.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Failed to delete guest IP range from a new subnet/C
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2621
> 
> 
> This addresses bug Cloudstack-2621.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   server/src/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManagerImpl.java 59e70cf 
>   server/src/com/cloud/network/router/VirtualNetworkApplianceManagerImpl.java 
> db4786a 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11435/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> tested on master.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> bharat kumar
> 
>

Re: Chip and David elected ASF Members

[Joe Brockmeier]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013, at 03:31 AM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
> Congratulations to Chip and David for being elected members of the ASF:
> 
> https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_welcomes2

Awesome work, folks! Congrats!

Best,

jzb
-- 
Joe Brockmeier
j...@zonker.net
Twitter: @jzb
http://www.dissociatedpress.net/

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[Chip Childers]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 12:26:32AM -0600, Mike Tutkowski wrote:
> Thanks for all the work on this everyone!

+1

Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-2963 Build failure due to validateIpRange test failure

[bharat kumar]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11833/
---

Review request for cloudstack and Abhinandan Prateek.


Description
---

CLOUDSTACK-2963 Build failure due to validateIpRange test failure
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2963


This addresses bug Cloudstack-2963.


Diffs
-

  server/test/com/cloud/configuration/ValidateIpRangeTest.java a083cc6 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11833/diff/


Testing
---

Test succeeded on master.


Thanks,

bharat kumar

Re: [Discuss][Proposal] Configurable option for egress firewall rules default policy

[Chip Childers]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:58:14AM +, Jayapal Reddy Uradi wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> The current egress firewall rule feature by default BLOCK the all the 
> outgoing traffic if there are no user configured rules.
> 
> I am proposing configurable option for the egress firewall rules using the 
> Network offering.
> In network offering for firewall service provider, user can select egress 
> default policy to allow/deny.
> 
> Here is bug# https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1578
> 
> Please find below FS.
> 
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Egress+firewall+rules+-+Ability+to+change+the+default
> 
> Please provide your comments.
> 
> Thanks,
> Jayapal  

+1 to this feature

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-2963 Build failure due to validateIpRange test failure

[ASF Subversion and Git Services]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11833/#review21793
---


Commit 31f0e3453993ea24fab2d2c4ff938c867d23c74c in branch refs/heads/master 
from Bharat Kumar
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;h=31f0e34 ]

CLOUDSTACK-2963 Build failure due to validateIpRange test failure

Signed-off-by: Abhinandan Prateek 


- ASF Subversion and Git Services


On June 12, 2013, 1:15 p.m., bharat kumar wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11833/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 12, 2013, 1:15 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack and Abhinandan Prateek.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> CLOUDSTACK-2963 Build failure due to validateIpRange test failure
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2963
> 
> 
> This addresses bug Cloudstack-2963.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   server/test/com/cloud/configuration/ValidateIpRangeTest.java a083cc6 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11833/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> Test succeeded on master.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> bharat kumar
> 
>

RE: [ACS42] Ceph Storage Integration with Cloudstack -

[Sudha Ponnaganti]

Ok - thanks for clarification!

-Original Message-
From: Wido den Hollander [mailto:w...@widodh.nl] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 11:20 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [ACS42] Ceph Storage Integration with Cloudstack -



On 06/12/2013 07:38 AM, Sudha Ponnaganti wrote:
> Thanks Wido for the response. I have another question.  Is there any impact 
> because of storage refactoring work that Edison and min have been doing??
>

I don't think so. We could implement some new strategies for RBD with the new 
framework, but I haven't done that.

The Object Store is something different, since that enables you to use the 
Amazon S3 compatible RADOS Gateway from Ceph as Secondary Storage (Backup and 
Template).

Wido

> -Original Message-
> From: Wido den Hollander [mailto:w...@widodh.nl]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 10:23 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [ACS42] Ceph Storage Integration with Cloudstack -
>
> Hi,
>
> I recently wrote a short blog post about this:
> http://blog.widodh.nl/2013/06/a-quick-note-on-running-cloudstack-with-
> rbd-on-ubuntu-12-04/
>
> The RBD integration in CloudStack 4.2 (master branch) is ready for testing, 
> not everything has been verified by me, but it should work.
>
> Things that I'm not yet sure about:
> * Expunging of RBD volumes
> * Expunging of unused templates from Primary Storage
>
> It has all been integrated into the build process in master, so it should be 
> just a matter of setting up a cluster from the master branch, add Ceph 
> primary storage and see if it works.
>
> A second pair of eyes on the code is always welcome, since I probably forgot 
> something.
>
> Wido
>
> On 06/12/2013 03:36 AM, Sudha Ponnaganti wrote:
>> Hi Wido,
>>
>> This is regarding Ceph integration validation related to the 
>> following tickets
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-574
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1191
>>
>> If someone want to validate Ceph integration with Cloudstack, what are the 
>> requirements and also is code ready for someone to validate??
>>
>> Thanks
>> /sudha
>>
>>

ssvm-check.sh on xen

[Daan Hoogland]

H,

I worked through the ssvm troubleshoot page and ran the ssvm-check.sh on the 
s-1-vm on my dev environment. The script failed because it tries to write to a 
mount it identifies as an nfs mount falsely.

The mount
rpc_pipefs on /var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs type rpc_pipefs (rw,relatime)
is identified as a nfs-mount
I changed some grep pipelines to make sure it is ignored. Should I commit this 
somewhere?


# check to see if we have the NFS volume mounted
echo 
mount|grep -v sunrpc|grep -v /nfs/ |grep nfs 1> /dev/null 2>&1
if [ $? -eq 0 ]
then
echo "NFS is currently mounted"
# check for write access
for MOUNTPT in `mount|grep -v sunrpc| grep -v /nfs/ |grep nfs| awk '{print $3}'`
do
if [ $MOUNTPT != "/proc/xen" ] # mounted by xen

kind regards,
Daan Hoogland

RE: ssvm-check.sh on xen

[Rajesh Battala]

Daan, 
I had already fixed the issue and committed to master. There is issue with 
packing so the new script is not getting packaged.

Thanks
Rajesh Battala

> -Original Message-
> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:dhoogl...@schubergphilis.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 7:36 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: ssvm-check.sh on xen
> 
> H,
> 
> I worked through the ssvm troubleshoot page and ran the ssvm-check.sh on
> the s-1-vm on my dev environment. The script failed because it tries to write
> to a mount it identifies as an nfs mount falsely.
> 
> The mount
> rpc_pipefs on /var/lib/nfs/rpc_pipefs type rpc_pipefs (rw,relatime) is
> identified as a nfs-mount I changed some grep pipelines to make sure it is
> ignored. Should I commit this somewhere?
> 
> 
> # check to see if we have the NFS volume mounted echo
> 
> mount|grep -v sunrpc|grep -v /nfs/ |grep nfs 1> /dev/null 2>&1
> if [ $? -eq 0 ]
> then
> echo "NFS is currently mounted"
> # check for write access
> for MOUNTPT in `mount|grep -v sunrpc| grep -v /nfs/ |grep nfs| awk '{print
> $3}'` do if [ $MOUNTPT != "/proc/xen" ] # mounted by xen
> 
> kind regards,
> Daan Hoogland

Review Request: Automation: Network life cycle tests

[Gaurav Aradhye]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11835/
---

Review request for cloudstack, Prasanna Santhanam and Rayees Namathponnan.


Description
---

Changed code related to verifying round robin of ip address allocation.


Diffs
-

  test/integration/smoke/test_network.py a65748d 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11835/diff/


Testing
---


Thanks,

Gaurav Aradhye

RE: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

[William Jiang]

Hi Jessica,
Thanks for the response. What's the difference of those three roles?
If I understand right, I will give it the role of "normal-user" .

Thanks,
William

-Original Message-
From: Jessica Wang [mailto:jessica.w...@citrix.com]
Sent: June-11-13 6:23 PM
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; 
users...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

> I want to give access to a user to see only a specific zone.

What is the role of the user that you want to give access to see only a 
specific zone?
A normal-user, a domain-admin, or a root-admin?


-Original Message-
From: William Jiang [mailto:william.ji...@manwin.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 3:17 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; users...@cloudstack.apache.org; 
us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

Hi,

if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone? We have multiple 
zone in our cloudstack 3.0 and I want to give access to a user to see only a 
specific zone.

Thanks,
William
This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not 
waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying of 
this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient 
is unauthorized. If you received this e-mail in error, please advise me (by 
return e-mail or otherwise) immediately. Ce courrier ?lectronique est 
confidentiel et prot?g?. L'exp?diteur ne renonce pas aux droits et obligations 
qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des 
renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le (les) 
destinataire(s) d?sign?(s) est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courrier 
?lectronique par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser imm?diatement, par retour de 
courrier ?lectronique ou par un autre moyen.
This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not 
waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying of 
this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient 
is unauthorized. If you received this e-mail in error, please advise me (by 
return e-mail or otherwise) immediately. Ce courrier électronique est 
confidentiel et protégé. L'expéditeur ne renonce pas aux droits et obligations 
qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des 
renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le (les) 
destinataire(s) désigné(s) est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courrier 
électronique par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser immédiatement, par retour de 
courrier électronique ou par un autre moyen.

RE: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

[William Jiang]

Hi Nitin,
Thanks for the response, but I can't open the link you send to me, would you 
mind double check and re-send to me?
Thanks.

William

-Original Message-
From: Nitin Mehta [mailto:nitin.me...@citrix.com]
Sent: June-12-13 2:08 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; users...@cloudstack.apache.org; 
us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

William - good use case, CS has the ability to dedicate resources to an account 
domain, but not restrict them. You can read about that here - 
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Dedicated+Resources+
-+Private+zone%2C+pod%2C+cluster%2C+host+Functional+Spec

Do you want to raise an enhancement for restricting a domain/account to a zone ?

Thanks,
-Nitin

On 12/06/13 3:47 AM, "William Jiang"  wrote:

>Hi,
>
>if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone? We have
>multiple zone in our cloudstack 3.0 and I want to give access to a user
>to see only a specific zone.
>
>Thanks,
>William
>This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does
>not waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or
>copying of this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an
>intended recipient is unauthorized. If you received this e-mail in
>error, please advise me (by return e-mail or otherwise) immediately. Ce
>courrier ?lectronique est confidentiel et prot?g?. L'exp?diteur ne
>renonce pas aux droits et obligations qui s'y rapportent. Toute
>diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des renseignements
>qu'il contient par une personne autre que le (les) destinataire(s)
>d?sign?(s) est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courrier ?lectronique par
>erreur, veuillez m'en aviser imm?diatement, par retour de courrier 
>?lectronique ou par un autre moyen.

This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not 
waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying of 
this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient 
is unauthorized. If you received this e-mail in error, please advise me (by 
return e-mail or otherwise) immediately. Ce courrier électronique est 
confidentiel et protégé. L'expéditeur ne renonce pas aux droits et obligations 
qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des 
renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le (les) 
destinataire(s) désigné(s) est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courrier 
électronique par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser immédiatement, par retour de 
courrier électronique ou par un autre moyen.

RE: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

[Pranav Saxena]

Hi ,

You could let the root admin dedicate a zone to specific domain/account . In 
that case only that user would have access to that zone.  This is a new feature 
introduced in 4.2

Thanks,
Pranav

-Original Message-
From: William Jiang [mailto:william.ji...@manwin.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 7:45 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; us...@cloudstack.apache.org; 
users...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

Hi Jessica,
Thanks for the response. What's the difference of those three roles?
If I understand right, I will give it the role of "normal-user" .

Thanks,
William

-Original Message-
From: Jessica Wang [mailto:jessica.w...@citrix.com]
Sent: June-11-13 6:23 PM
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; 
users...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

> I want to give access to a user to see only a specific zone.

What is the role of the user that you want to give access to see only a 
specific zone?
A normal-user, a domain-admin, or a root-admin?


-Original Message-
From: William Jiang [mailto:william.ji...@manwin.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 3:17 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; users...@cloudstack.apache.org; 
us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

Hi,

if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone? We have multiple 
zone in our cloudstack 3.0 and I want to give access to a user to see only a 
specific zone.

Thanks,
William
This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not 
waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying of 
this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient 
is unauthorized. If you received this e-mail in error, please advise me (by 
return e-mail or otherwise) immediately. Ce courrier ?lectronique est 
confidentiel et prot?g?. L'exp?diteur ne renonce pas aux droits et obligations 
qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des 
renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le (les) 
destinataire(s) d?sign?(s) est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courrier 
?lectronique par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser imm?diatement, par retour de 
courrier ?lectronique ou par un autre moyen.
This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not 
waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying of 
this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient 
is unauthorized. If you received this e-mail in error, please advise me (by 
return e-mail or otherwise) immediately. Ce courrier électronique est 
confidentiel et protégé. L'expéditeur ne renonce pas aux droits et obligations 
qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des 
renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le (les) 
destinataire(s) désigné(s) est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courrier 
électronique par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser immédiatement, par retour de 
courrier électronique ou par un autre moyen.

RE: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

[Pranav Saxena]

Here is the functional spec -

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Dedicated+Resources+-+Private+zone,+pod,+cluster,+host+Functional+Spec
 
In my last statement ,  a user anyways can't see the infrastructure section on 
the UI . So by  allowing the root admin to dedicate a  zone to an 
domain/account , that account can only use that zone's resources.

-Original Message-
From: Pranav Saxena [mailto:pranav.sax...@citrix.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 7:54 PM
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; 
users...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

Hi ,

You could let the root admin dedicate a zone to specific domain/account . In 
that case only that user would have access to that zone.  This is a new feature 
introduced in 4.2

Thanks,
Pranav

-Original Message-
From: William Jiang [mailto:william.ji...@manwin.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 7:45 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; us...@cloudstack.apache.org; 
users...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

Hi Jessica,
Thanks for the response. What's the difference of those three roles?
If I understand right, I will give it the role of "normal-user" .

Thanks,
William

-Original Message-
From: Jessica Wang [mailto:jessica.w...@citrix.com]
Sent: June-11-13 6:23 PM
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; 
users...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

> I want to give access to a user to see only a specific zone.

What is the role of the user that you want to give access to see only a 
specific zone?
A normal-user, a domain-admin, or a root-admin?


-Original Message-
From: William Jiang [mailto:william.ji...@manwin.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 3:17 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; users...@cloudstack.apache.org; 
us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

Hi,

if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone? We have multiple 
zone in our cloudstack 3.0 and I want to give access to a user to see only a 
specific zone.

Thanks,
William
This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not 
waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying of 
this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient 
is unauthorized. If you received this e-mail in error, please advise me (by 
return e-mail or otherwise) immediately. Ce courrier ?lectronique est 
confidentiel et prot?g?. L'exp?diteur ne renonce pas aux droits et obligations 
qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des 
renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le (les) 
destinataire(s) d?sign?(s) est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courrier 
?lectronique par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser imm?diatement, par retour de 
courrier ?lectronique ou par un autre moyen.
This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not 
waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying of 
this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient 
is unauthorized. If you received this e-mail in error, please advise me (by 
return e-mail or otherwise) immediately. Ce courrier électronique est 
confidentiel et protégé. L'expéditeur ne renonce pas aux droits et obligations 
qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des 
renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le (les) 
destinataire(s) désigné(s) est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courrier 
électronique par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser immédiatement, par retour de 
courrier électronique ou par un autre moyen.

Cloning VMs in CloudStack, or not...

[La Motta, David]

Hey everybody, I've got a couple of questions on cloning VM instances in 
CloudStack.  I haven't seen anything in the UI that would allow me to create, 
say, 1000 clones of a VM instance in a given cluster.  Is there such 
functionality in CloudStack?

If there isn't, can I drop to the hypervisor and create the clones there, then 
register all those new VMs in CloudStack?  I haven't found a command in the 
REST API that would allow me to register a hypervisor VM with CloudStack.

Would I have to create a template from the VM in the hypervisor, upload the 
template to CS, then create an instance out of that template?  Rinse and repeat 
1000 times?

I am thinking in terms of a service provider who may have the need to pump out 
large quantities of VMs from within CloudStack.

Thoughts?


David La Motta
Technical Marketing Engineer
Citrix Solutions

NetApp
919.476.5042
dlamo...@netapp.com

Re: Cloning VMs in CloudStack, or not...

[Chip Childers]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 02:35:18PM +, La Motta, David wrote:
> Hey everybody, I've got a couple of questions on cloning VM instances in 
> CloudStack.  I haven't seen anything in the UI that would allow me to create, 
> say, 1000 clones of a VM instance in a given cluster.  Is there such 
> functionality in CloudStack?

It's a 2 step process:

1) Create a template from the source VM
2) Create VM's (using the API) from that template

> 
> If there isn't, can I drop to the hypervisor and create the clones there, 
> then register all those new VMs in CloudStack?  I haven't found a command in 
> the REST API that would allow me to register a hypervisor VM with CloudStack.
> 
> Would I have to create a template from the VM in the hypervisor, upload the 
> template to CS, then create an instance out of that template?  Rinse and 
> repeat 1000 times?
> 

CS doesn't really handle changes done within the HV directly.  Use the
steps listed above.

> I am thinking in terms of a service provider who may have the need to pump 
> out large quantities of VMs from within CloudStack.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> 
> David La Motta
> Technical Marketing Engineer
> Citrix Solutions
> 
> NetApp
> 919.476.5042
> dlamo...@netapp.com
> 
> 
> 

Re: [GSOC] NullPointerException when deployVM using GRE isolation method. Help me!

[Nguyen Anh Tu]

@Chiradeep Vittal: I saw what happen on this error. The problem is: the *
guru.allocate()* function in NetworkManager called to
ExternalGuestNetworkGuru instead of OvsGuestNetworkGuru.

*NetworkGuru guru = AdapterBase.getAdapterByName(_networkGurus,
network.getGuruName())*
this function return ExternalGuestNetworkGuru

And even if it calls to OvsGuestNetworkGuru, the problem does still appear
because the OvsGuestNetworkGuru doesn't have the allocate() function.


2013/6/11 Chiradeep Vittal 

> Yes
>
> On 6/10/13 1:12 PM, "Sebastien Goasguen"  wrote:
>
> >
> >On Jun 10, 2013, at 3:07 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
> > wrote:
> >
> >> The check for the config is incorrect. The check should be whether the
> >> network in the input parameter has the isolation method 'GRE'. You can
> >>see
> >> the canHandle method on how to check for this. Although, I don't see why
> >> this check should even be necessary. The network will be associated with
> >> the guru at design time.
> >
> >Chiradeep, that's a bug then ?
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> On 6/10/13 7:17 AM, "Nguyen Anh Tu"  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi forks,
> >>>
> >>> I'm trying OVS tunnel with XCP 1.6 and get error NullPointerException
> >>>when
> >>> executing deployVM.
> >>>
> >>> I found this error starting from the below code.
> >>>
> >>> *NetworkManagerImpl.java*
> >>>
> >>> *NicProfile profile = guru.allocate(network, requested, vm); (1)*
> >>>   if (isDefaultNic != null) {
> >>>   profile.setDefaultNic(
> >>> isDefaultNic);
> >>>   }
> >>>
> >>> *ExtenalGuestNetworkGuru.java*
> >>>
> >>>   @Override
> >>>  * public NicProfile allocate(Network config, NicProfile nic,
> >>> VirtualMachineProfile vm) throws
> >>> InsufficientVirtualNetworkCapcityException,
> >>>   InsufficientAddressCapacityException* {
> >>>
> >>>   if
> >>>
> >>>(_networkModel.networkIsConfiguredForExternalNetworking(config.getDataCe
> >>>nt
> >>> erId(),
> >>> config.getId()) && nic != null && nic.getRequestedIpv4() != null) {
> >>>   throw new CloudRuntimeException("Does not support custom ip
> >>> allocation at this time: " + nic);
> >>>   }
> >>>
> >>>   NicProfile profile = super.allocate(config, nic, vm);
> >>>
> >>>   *boolean _isEnabled =
> >>>
> >>>Boolean.parseBoolean(_configDao.getValue(Config.OvsTunnelNetwork.key()))
> >>>;
> >>> (2)
> >>>   if (_isEnabled) {
> >>>   return null;
> >>>   }*
> >>>
> >>>   if
> >>>
> >>>(_networkModel.networkIsConfiguredForExternalNetworking(config.getDataCe
> >>>nt
> >>> erId(),
> >>> config.getId())) {
> >>>   profile.setStrategy(ReservationStrategy.Start);
> >>>   /* We won't clear IP address, because router may set gateway
> >>> as
> >>> it IP, and it would be updated properly later */
> >>>   //profile.setIp4Address(null);
> >>>   profile.setGateway(null);
> >>>   profile.setNetmask(null);
> >>>   }
> >>>
> >>>   return profile;
> >>>   }*
> >>>
> >>> *
> >>> The return from (1) is NULL, because at (2) *sdn.ovs.controller* set to
> >>> true. So profile = NULL and then we get NullPointerException error in
> >>>the
> >>> next step.
> >>>
> >>> This error prevents me to deployVM using GRE isolation method. If I
> >>>set *
> >>> sdn.ovs.controller* = false, no error anymore but can't using GRE.
> >>>
> >>> How can I fix this? Thanks for any help.
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>>
> >>> N.g.U.y.e.N.A.n.H.t.U
> >>
> >
>
>


-- 

N.g.U.y.e.N.A.n.H.t.U

RE: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

[William Jiang]

Hi Kelcey,
Great thanks for your help.

Regards,
William

-Original Message-
From: Kelcey Jamison Damage [mailto:kel...@bbits.ca]
Sent: June-11-13 6:44 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

Also the our user structure is per-domain:

[]root| {Quota}}{Quota}   < --- public 
zone
  |
  {Access}[]sub-domain| {Restricted}  < --- private 
zone
  |
  {Access}  {Restricted}  []t2-sub-domain|< --- private 
zone



- Original Message -
From: "Kelcey Jamison Damage" 
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 3:35:30 PM
Subject: Re: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

in cloudstack the domain or subdomain would require 1 or more 'private zones' 
to restrict user access

If you make a zone under root(called a public zone) then everyone can access 
and is restricted by quotas.

hope that helps.

- Original Message -
From: "Jessica Wang" 
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org, dev@cloudstack.apache.org, 
users...@cloudstack.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 3:23:08 PM
Subject: RE: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

> I want to give access to a user to see only a specific zone.

What is the role of the user that you want to give access to see only a 
specific zone?
A normal-user, a domain-admin, or a root-admin?


-Original Message-
From: William Jiang [mailto:william.ji...@manwin.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 3:17 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; users...@cloudstack.apache.org; 
us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone

Hi,

if anybody know how to restrict access to a specific zone? We have multiple 
zone in our cloudstack 3.0 and I want to give access to a user to see only a 
specific zone.

Thanks,
William
This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not 
waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying of 
this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient 
is unauthorized. If you received this e-mail in error, please advise me (by 
return e-mail or otherwise) immediately. Ce courrier ?lectronique est 
confidentiel et prot?g?. L'exp?diteur ne renonce pas aux droits et obligations 
qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des 
renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le (les) 
destinataire(s) d?sign?(s) est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courrier 
?lectronique par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser imm?diatement, par retour de 
courrier ?lectronique ou par un autre moyen.
This e-mail may be privileged and/or confidential, and the sender does not 
waive any related rights and obligations. Any distribution, use or copying of 
this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended recipient 
is unauthorized. If you received this e-mail in error, please advise me (by 
return e-mail or otherwise) immediately. Ce courrier électronique est 
confidentiel et protégé. L'expéditeur ne renonce pas aux droits et obligations 
qui s'y rapportent. Toute diffusion, utilisation ou copie de ce message ou des 
renseignements qu'il contient par une personne autre que le (les) 
destinataire(s) désigné(s) est interdite. Si vous recevez ce courrier 
électronique par erreur, veuillez m'en aviser immédiatement, par retour de 
courrier électronique ou par un autre moyen.

Re: Cloning VMs in CloudStack, or not...

[La Motta, David]

Ok, thanks.  So it is doable.  The question now being how fast this process 
will be, since the VM creation will ultimately be done on the hypervisor.

What is the API that I could use to create a VM from a template?  I am looking 
at the 4.1 REST API and there is nothing for creating under the Virtual Machine 
section for Root, Domain, or User.

Thanks, Chip.



David La Motta
Technical Marketing Engineer
Citrix Solutions

NetApp
919.476.5042
dlamo...@netapp.com



On Jun 12, 2013, at 10:37 AM, Chip Childers 
mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com>>
 wrote:

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 02:35:18PM +, La Motta, David wrote:
Hey everybody, I've got a couple of questions on cloning VM instances in 
CloudStack.  I haven't seen anything in the UI that would allow me to create, 
say, 1000 clones of a VM instance in a given cluster.  Is there such 
functionality in CloudStack?

It's a 2 step process:

1) Create a template from the source VM
2) Create VM's (using the API) from that template


If there isn't, can I drop to the hypervisor and create the clones there, then 
register all those new VMs in CloudStack?  I haven't found a command in the 
REST API that would allow me to register a hypervisor VM with CloudStack.

Would I have to create a template from the VM in the hypervisor, upload the 
template to CS, then create an instance out of that template?  Rinse and repeat 
1000 times?


CS doesn't really handle changes done within the HV directly.  Use the
steps listed above.

I am thinking in terms of a service provider who may have the need to pump out 
large quantities of VMs from within CloudStack.

Thoughts?


David La Motta
Technical Marketing Engineer
Citrix Solutions

NetApp
919.476.5042
dlamo...@netapp.com

Re: Cloning VMs in CloudStack, or not...

[Chip Childers]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 02:49:42PM +, La Motta, David wrote:
> Ok, thanks.  So it is doable.  The question now being how fast this process 
> will be, since the VM creation will ultimately be done on the hypervisor.
> 
> What is the API that I could use to create a VM from a template?  I am 
> looking at the 4.1 REST API and there is nothing for creating under the 
> Virtual Machine section for Root, Domain, or User.
> 
> Thanks, Chip.

You always have to specify a templateid param for the
deployVirtualMachine API call [1].  Are you looking at some other API
call?

-chip

[1] 
http://cloudstack.apache.org/docs/api/apidocs-4.1/user/deployVirtualMachine.html

Re: Cloning VMs in CloudStack, or not...

[La Motta, David]

Nope!  That's the one I was looking for.  Too close to destroyVirtualMachine… 
didn't even see it  ;-)

Thanks again.


David La Motta
Technical Marketing Engineer
Citrix Solutions

NetApp
919.476.5042
dlamo...@netapp.com



On Jun 12, 2013, at 10:54 AM, Chip Childers 
mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com>>
 wrote:

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 02:49:42PM +, La Motta, David wrote:
Ok, thanks.  So it is doable.  The question now being how fast this process 
will be, since the VM creation will ultimately be done on the hypervisor.

What is the API that I could use to create a VM from a template?  I am looking 
at the 4.1 REST API and there is nothing for creating under the Virtual Machine 
section for Root, Domain, or User.

Thanks, Chip.

You always have to specify a templateid param for the
deployVirtualMachine API call [1].  Are you looking at some other API
call?

-chip

[1] 
http://cloudstack.apache.org/docs/api/apidocs-4.1/user/deployVirtualMachine.html

Re: Review Request: Fix for test case failure test_network.py:test_delete_account - CLOUDSTACK-2898

[ASF Subversion and Git Services]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11713/#review21796
---


Commit 19bed631939d7f17ec6e3d1393002b866a458104 in branch refs/heads/master 
from Gaurav Aradhye
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;h=19bed63 ]

CLOUDSTACK-2898: Fixing test case issue test_network.py:test_delete_account

When the router for an account is deleted listRouters throws an
exception, handle the exception to pass the test.

Signed-off-by: Prasanna Santhanam 


- ASF Subversion and Git Services


On June 11, 2013, 11:17 p.m., Rayees Namathponnan wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11713/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 11, 2013, 11:17 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack, Prasanna Santhanam and Girish Shilamkar.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2898
> 
> In this test case we need to capture "cloudstackAPIException" before 
> capturing more generic exceptions
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11713/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> Tested 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Rayees Namathponnan
> 
>

RE: [Discuss][Proposal] Configurable option for egress firewall rules default policy

[Mathias Mullins]

VERY +1 on this feature. 


From: Chip Childers [chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 9:18 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: Chiradeep Vittal
Subject: Re: [Discuss][Proposal] Configurable option for  egress firewall rules 
default policy

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:58:14AM +, Jayapal Reddy Uradi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The current egress firewall rule feature by default BLOCK the all the 
> outgoing traffic if there are no user configured rules.
>
> I am proposing configurable option for the egress firewall rules using the 
> Network offering.
> In network offering for firewall service provider, user can select egress 
> default policy to allow/deny.
>
> Here is bug# https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1578
>
> Please find below FS.
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Egress+firewall+rules+-+Ability+to+change+the+default
>
> Please provide your comments.
>
> Thanks,
> Jayapal

+1 to this feature

Re: Chip and David elected ASF Members

[kel...@backbonetechnology.com]

Congratulations!

Sent from my HTC

- Reply message -
From: "Joe Brockmeier" 
To: 
Subject: Chip and David elected ASF Members
Date: Wed, Jun 12, 2013 6:00 AM

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013, at 03:31 AM, Sebastien Goasguen wrote:
> Congratulations to Chip and David for being elected members of the ASF:
> 
> https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_welcomes2

Awesome work, folks! Congrats!

Best,

jzb
-- 
Joe Brockmeier
j...@zonker.net
Twitter: @jzb
http://www.dissociatedpress.net/

Re: Review Request: Automation: Network life cycle tests

[Prasanna Santhanam]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11835/#review21797
---



test/integration/smoke/test_network.py


account is not derefenced as account.account anymore. Was this change 
unintended? All instances of account.account were changed to account only 
sometime back in all the tests


- Prasanna Santhanam


On June 12, 2013, 2:11 p.m., Gaurav Aradhye wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11835/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 12, 2013, 2:11 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack, Prasanna Santhanam and Rayees Namathponnan.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> Changed code related to verifying round robin of ip address allocation.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   test/integration/smoke/test_network.py a65748d 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11835/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Gaurav Aradhye
> 
>

Re: Review Request: Automation: Add testcases for Affinity/Anti-Affinity Rules

[Prasanna Santhanam]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11067/#review21798
---


Girish, I'm only able to apply patch 1 that adds the test_affinity_groups 
module. Subsequent patches fail. Can you squash all the patches starting from 
the first patch that adds the tests for affinity groups into one patch please? 
Sorry for the delays.

- Prasanna Santhanam


On June 10, 2013, 10:03 a.m., Girish Shilamkar wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11067/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 10, 2013, 10:03 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack, Prachi Damle, Prasanna Santhanam, and 
> sangeetha hariharan.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> Add testcases for Affinity/Anti-Affinity Rules
> 
> 
> This addresses bug CLOUDSTACK-2254.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   test/integration/component/test_affinity_groups.py PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11067/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> The tests which are not skipped are working.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Girish Shilamkar
> 
>

Re: Review Request: fix the occurences of account.account. to account.

[Prasanna Santhanam]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11677/#review21799
---


Fails to apply :(

~/workspace/cloudstack/incubator-cloudstack/patch(branch:master*) » git am -s 
11677.patch
Applying: CLOUDSTACK-2363: fix to conform to the lib changes
error: patch failed: test/integration/component/test_advancedsg_networks.py:726
error: test/integration/component/test_advancedsg_networks.py: patch does not 
apply
error: patch failed: test/integration/component/test_shared_networks.py:2309
error: test/integration/component/test_shared_networks.py: patch does not apply
Patch failed at 0001 CLOUDSTACK-2363: fix to conform to the lib changes
When you have resolved this problem run "git am --resolved".
If you would prefer to skip this patch, instead run "git am --skip".
To restore the original branch and stop patching run "git am --abort".


- Prasanna Santhanam


On June 6, 2013, 4:34 p.m., SrikanteswaraRao Talluri wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11677/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 6, 2013, 4:34 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack and Prasanna Santhanam.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> fix the occurences of account.account. to account.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   test/integration/component/test_advancedsg_networks.py e24254d 
>   test/integration/component/test_custom_hostname.py a85f619 
>   test/integration/component/test_netscaler_configs.py 1c67bc4 
>   test/integration/component/test_netscaler_lb.py 80b3f0b 
>   test/integration/component/test_netscaler_lb_algo.py 4a2d1fe 
>   test/integration/component/test_netscaler_lb_sticky.py 7f391d0 
>   test/integration/component/test_shared_networks.py 5f96419 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11677/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> tested
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> SrikanteswaraRao Talluri
> 
>

Re: Review Request: fix the occurences of account.account. to account.

[Prasanna Santhanam]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11677/#review21800
---

Ship it!


862b955

- Prasanna Santhanam


On June 6, 2013, 4:34 p.m., SrikanteswaraRao Talluri wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11677/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 6, 2013, 4:34 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack and Prasanna Santhanam.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> fix the occurences of account.account. to account.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   test/integration/component/test_advancedsg_networks.py e24254d 
>   test/integration/component/test_custom_hostname.py a85f619 
>   test/integration/component/test_netscaler_configs.py 1c67bc4 
>   test/integration/component/test_netscaler_lb.py 80b3f0b 
>   test/integration/component/test_netscaler_lb_algo.py 4a2d1fe 
>   test/integration/component/test_netscaler_lb_sticky.py 7f391d0 
>   test/integration/component/test_shared_networks.py 5f96419 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11677/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> tested
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> SrikanteswaraRao Talluri
> 
>

Re: Review Request: add zone wide primary storage tests

[Prasanna Santhanam]

> On May 31, 2013, 4:43 a.m., Prasanna Santhanam wrote:
> > test/integration/smoke/test_zwps.py, line 127
> > 
> >
> > This test is not required. If I deploy a zone with zone-wide storage 
> > then the regular deployVM test will be sufficient.
> 
> SrikanteswaraRao Talluri wrote:
> Above suggestion is enough for deploy VM when there is only zone-wide 
> storage, the case  added here is a case where there are multiple primaries 
> and if you want to choose where your VM to be on ZWPS.
> 
> For testing VM life cycle tests on different scoped(CLUSTER, ZONE, HOST) 
> primary storages, if we have a zone deployed with just that specific scoped 
> storage, I agree , just running VM life cycle would suffice.

Can I run this test on any configuration of advanced zone and NFS storage? Will 
this need to have a zone-wide primary storage added to work?


- Prasanna


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11462/#review21227
---


On May 28, 2013, 3:24 p.m., SrikanteswaraRao Talluri wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11462/
> ---
> 
> (Updated May 28, 2013, 3:24 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack, Prasanna Santhanam and Sateesh Chodapuneedi.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> Added few basic zone wide primary storage tests.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug CLOUDSTACK-2710.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   test/integration/smoke/test_primary_storage.py 598654d 
>   test/integration/smoke/test_zwps.py PRE-CREATION 
>   tools/marvin/marvin/integration/lib/base.py ec1c34e 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11462/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> done.
> teardown() fails as there is a bug while moving a storagepool into 
> maintenance.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> SrikanteswaraRao Talluri
> 
>

RE: Hadoop cluster running in cloudstack

[Alex Huang]

I thought about this a bit yesterday after Chiradeep talked to me.

The first fix is definitely allow multiple local storage per host.  That 
requires some work on cloudstack but I don't see it as a big problem.

Then a storage-pool allocator can be written such that it always allocates 
separate local storage pools to vms on the same host.  That should be minimal 
work and can be taken as a side project.

--Alex

> -Original Message-
> From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 1:07 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Hadoop cluster running in cloudstack
> 
> Taking it to dev@ to see if there is any interest.
> 
> 
> It is a good and interesting requirement. I can see hacking 'pre-setup'
> storage with tags to achieve this, but it is going to be a fragile hack.
> I believe GCE also has the concept of some instance types having dedicated
> spindles.
> 
> 
> On 6/6/13 11:14 AM, "David Ortiz"  wrote:
> 
> >Chiradeep,
> > Currently I am working with KVM hypervisor nodes.  The use case of
> >having 4 spindles and assigning one to each node is exactly what I
> >would like to do.  For the moment I have all four spindles configured
> >in a RAID with the cloudstack local storage pointed at it.
> >Shanker,
> >  I had not seen that slideshow yet, so thank you for pointing me
> >to it.  As of now, the hadoop resources I am using are statically
> >allocated between 4 hosts.  As it stands now, I am constrained to those
> >resources without the ability to add any additional storage cluster (or
> >additional storage to my current shared storage appliance), or additional
> nodes.
> >Fortunately, my use cases don't require any kind of reallocation of the
> >hadoop nodes.  It's more clients for the cluster as well as web service
> >nodes that run clients that are being dynamically spun up and down.  I
> >have found that I can get through my jobs alright, they just take a lot
> >of extra time to run since I have the storage acting as a bottleneck
> >right now.
> >Thanks, David Ortiz
> >
> >> From: run...@gmail.com
> >> Subject: Re: Hadoop cluster running in cloudstack
> >> Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2013 10:23:50 -0400
> >> To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jun 6, 2013, at 4:05 AM, Shanker Balan
> >>
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >> > On 05-Jun-2013, at 12:13 AM, David Ortiz  wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Hello,
> >> >>Has anyone tried running a hadoop cluster in a cloudstack
> >>environment?  I have set one up, but I am finding that I am having
> >>some IO contention between slave nodes on each host since they all
> >>share one local storage pool.  As I understand it, there is not
> >>currently a method for using multiple local storage pools with VMs
> >>through cloudstack.  Has anyone found a workaround for this by any
> chance?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Hi David,
> >> >
> >> > Have you seen Seb's
> >>http://www.slideshare.net/sebastiengoasguen/cloudstack-and-bigdata
> >>slides yet?
> >>
> >> As a quick disclaimer, the various configurations I highlight in this
> >>deck are a bit hand wavy and I did not test them. I just made a guess
> >>about how one might want to use the baremetal functionality in
> >>cloudstack. The main distinction being between using a "big data"
> >>store as storage backends of cloudstack and using cloudstack to
> >>provision a bigdata store on-demand.
> >>
> >> -sebastien
> >>
> >> >
> >> > In my experience running Hadoop (100+ nodes) on traditional
> >> > servers,
> >>its going to be really hard to scale up Hadoop workloads using local
> >>storage and HDFS on a cloud.
> >> >
> >> > I ran out of IOPS very quickly. There was enough CPU headroom but
> >>could not add more slots as disk became the bottleneck. Every time
> >>there was a node/disk failure, rebalancing was a nightmare with a 3x
> >>HDFS replication factor.
> >> >
> >> > If I were to run Hadoop on an IaaS cloud, I would do it very
> >> > similar
> >>to Amazon AWS EMR - instances backed by a "Storage As A Service" layer
> >>(S3) for big data instead of HDFS.
> >> >
> >> > The system would work as below:
> >> >
> >> > - Create a dedicated big data storage tier using a distributed
> >>filesystem like Gluster/Ceph/Isilon. Most of the vendors now provide
> >>S3 compat connectors for Hadoop.
> >> >
> >> > http://ceph.com/docs/master/cephfs/hadoop/
> >> > http://gluster.org/community/documentation/index.php/Hadoop
> >> > http://www.emc.com/big-data/scale-out-storage-hadoop.htm
> >> >
> >> > - Hadoop instances are spun up on bare metal or on hypervisors. The
> >>service offerings for "big data" instances could will run on dedicated
> >>hypervisors (via tags) with high bandwidth network connectivity to the
> >>storage service.
> >> >
> >> > - Hadoop instances use Local storage for run time data.
> >> >
> >> > - Hadoop VMs connect to the storage tier via connectors for
> >> > permanent
> >>storage
> >> >
> >> > Benefits:
> >> >
> >> > - Spinning up/down VMs don't cause HDFS rebalanci

Re: [GSOC] NullPointerException when deployVM using GRE isolation method. Help me!

[Nguyen Anh Tu]

@Chiradeep: I already implemented allocate() function to
OvsGuestNetworkGuru. The above error is no more appear.

Now I'll make OVS works with XCP 1.6. I tried and saw some new errors.
However, everything is more clearly.


2013/6/12 Nguyen Anh Tu 

> @Chiradeep Vittal: I saw what happen on this error. The problem is: the *
> guru.allocate()* function in NetworkManager called to
> ExternalGuestNetworkGuru instead of OvsGuestNetworkGuru.
>
> *NetworkGuru guru = AdapterBase.getAdapterByName(_networkGurus,
> network.getGuruName())*
> this function return ExternalGuestNetworkGuru
>
> And even if it calls to OvsGuestNetworkGuru, the problem does still appear
> because the OvsGuestNetworkGuru doesn't have the allocate() function.
>
>
> 2013/6/11 Chiradeep Vittal 
>
>> Yes
>>
>> On 6/10/13 1:12 PM, "Sebastien Goasguen"  wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >On Jun 10, 2013, at 3:07 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> The check for the config is incorrect. The check should be whether the
>> >> network in the input parameter has the isolation method 'GRE'. You can
>> >>see
>> >> the canHandle method on how to check for this. Although, I don't see
>> why
>> >> this check should even be necessary. The network will be associated
>> with
>> >> the guru at design time.
>> >
>> >Chiradeep, that's a bug then ?
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On 6/10/13 7:17 AM, "Nguyen Anh Tu"  wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Hi forks,
>> >>>
>> >>> I'm trying OVS tunnel with XCP 1.6 and get error NullPointerException
>> >>>when
>> >>> executing deployVM.
>> >>>
>> >>> I found this error starting from the below code.
>> >>>
>> >>> *NetworkManagerImpl.java*
>> >>>
>> >>> *NicProfile profile = guru.allocate(network, requested, vm); (1)*
>> >>>   if (isDefaultNic != null) {
>> >>>   profile.setDefaultNic(
>> >>> isDefaultNic);
>> >>>   }
>> >>>
>> >>> *ExtenalGuestNetworkGuru.java*
>> >>>
>> >>>   @Override
>> >>>  * public NicProfile allocate(Network config, NicProfile nic,
>> >>> VirtualMachineProfile vm) throws
>> >>> InsufficientVirtualNetworkCapcityException,
>> >>>   InsufficientAddressCapacityException* {
>> >>>
>> >>>   if
>> >>>
>>
>> >>>(_networkModel.networkIsConfiguredForExternalNetworking(config.getDataCe
>> >>>nt
>> >>> erId(),
>> >>> config.getId()) && nic != null && nic.getRequestedIpv4() != null) {
>> >>>   throw new CloudRuntimeException("Does not support custom ip
>> >>> allocation at this time: " + nic);
>> >>>   }
>> >>>
>> >>>   NicProfile profile = super.allocate(config, nic, vm);
>> >>>
>> >>>   *boolean _isEnabled =
>> >>>
>>
>> >>>Boolean.parseBoolean(_configDao.getValue(Config.OvsTunnelNetwork.key()))
>> >>>;
>> >>> (2)
>> >>>   if (_isEnabled) {
>> >>>   return null;
>> >>>   }*
>> >>>
>> >>>   if
>> >>>
>>
>> >>>(_networkModel.networkIsConfiguredForExternalNetworking(config.getDataCe
>> >>>nt
>> >>> erId(),
>> >>> config.getId())) {
>> >>>   profile.setStrategy(ReservationStrategy.Start);
>> >>>   /* We won't clear IP address, because router may set gateway
>> >>> as
>> >>> it IP, and it would be updated properly later */
>> >>>   //profile.setIp4Address(null);
>> >>>   profile.setGateway(null);
>> >>>   profile.setNetmask(null);
>> >>>   }
>> >>>
>> >>>   return profile;
>> >>>   }*
>> >>>
>> >>> *
>> >>> The return from (1) is NULL, because at (2) *sdn.ovs.controller* set
>> to
>> >>> true. So profile = NULL and then we get NullPointerException error in
>> >>>the
>> >>> next step.
>> >>>
>> >>> This error prevents me to deployVM using GRE isolation method. If I
>> >>>set *
>> >>> sdn.ovs.controller* = false, no error anymore but can't using GRE.
>> >>>
>> >>> How can I fix this? Thanks for any help.
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>>
>> >>> N.g.U.y.e.N.A.n.H.t.U
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> N.g.U.y.e.N.A.n.H.t.U
>



-- 

N.g.U.y.e.N.A.n.H.t.U

RE: Chip and David elected ASF Members

[Alex Huang]

Congratulations Chip and Dave!

--Alex

> -Original Message-
> From: Sebastien Goasguen [mailto:run...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 1:31 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Chip and David elected ASF Members
> 
> Congratulations to Chip and David for being elected members of the ASF:
> 
> https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundati
> on_welcomes2
> 
> -Sebastien

RE: UI Development

[Alex Huang]

Soheil,

Yes there is.   Look under the plugins folder for all the current plugins.  

CloudStack plugins allow not only code to be inserted to add functionality but 
APIs can be added to facilitate new functionalities.

I do ask everyone who are developing plugins to consider and discuss end user 
facing API changes on the list before making them.  Admin API changes can be 
added fairly quickly.

--Alex

> -Original Message-
> From: Brian Federle [mailto:brian.fede...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 12:44 PM
> To: 'dev@cloudstack.apache.org'
> Subject: RE: UI Development
> 
> I'm pretty sure there is a modular system in place for the backend, though I
> only do front-end development so I'm not familiar with it. Maybe a server-
> side dev can answer that?
> 
> -Brian
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Soheil Eizadi [mailto:seiz...@infoblox.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 11:52 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: UI Development
> 
> Hi Brian,
> Thanks for the detail.
> 
> I have looked at the UI-Plugin page, is there a matching server side plugin
> component to go along with the UI-Plugin to extend the CloudStack
> functionality?
> 
> -Soheil
> 
> 
> From: Brian Federle [brian.fede...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 11:44 AM
> To: 'dev@cloudstack.apache.org'
> Subject: RE: UI Development
> 
> Hi Soheil,
> 
> For the most part pretty much any IDE/text editor will work for UI
> development, as the code base is pure JS+HTML+CSS. I usually use Firebug
> for debugging purposes.
> 
> For IDEs, I would recommend IntelliJ IDEA, which has the best support for JS,
> including an integrated JS debugger. Not too familiar with Eclipse for web 
> dev,
> though.
> 
> Unfortunately UI documentation is a bit sparse right now; I'm in the process
> of adding more documentation when I can find time. For now, I would
> recommend going through the UI plugin development tutorial and see if it
> will address your needs for the feature:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/CLOUDSTACK/ui-plugin-tutorial.html. It goes
> through setting up a new list view with a set of actions.
> 
> -Brian
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Soheil Eizadi [mailto:seiz...@infoblox.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 11:35 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: UI Development
> 
> I did not find any UI development resources on the Wiki. I need to update
> the UI to support a new Device. I wanted to know if there is there any
> recommended tooling for the CloudStack UI. I was planning to use Eclipse
> JavaScript Development Tools (JSDT), but wanted to see if there is any
> recommended setup also what the recommended debugging environment
> would look like?
> Thanks,
> -Soheil

Re: Test halting build every now and then

[Mike Tutkowski]

Hi Daan,

Yeah, now that you remind me, I believe we did talk about a wireless setup
possibly being behind this a while ago. :)

When I'm working from home, I am on a wireless network.

In the office, my primary connection is via cable, but I do have another
connection to the Internet via wireless.

It's not the end of the world when this problem occurs. I just CTRL-C and
try again, but I thought if someone had a solution that perhaps I didn't
see that I could implement it on my side.

Thanks for your time!!


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Daan Hoogland  wrote:

> H Mike,
>
> I had this too, working from my home machine and got some hint on this
> list, stating a wireless interface on your machine might be the problem. I
> haven't been able to pinpoint the culprit yet. What is your setup?
>
> Regards,
> Daan Hoogland
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
> Sent: woensdag 12 juni 2013 1:19
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Test halting build every now and then
>
> Took five tries to get the build over this hump a moment ago.
>
> Any thoughts on what's going on there?
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Does anyone know if there is a way to stop the build from (very often)
> > halting here indefinitely?
> >
> > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,836 INFO  [utils.net.NetUtilsTest] (main:) IP is
> > 1234:5678::dd3b:e82c:ce6b:fe5c
> > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,839 INFO  [utils.net.NetUtilsTest] (main:) IP is
> > 1234:5678::814a:9955:e8e2:84f Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0,
> > Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.085 sec Running
> > com.cloud.utils.StringUtilsTest Tests run: 10, Failures: 0, Errors: 0,
> > Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.011 sec Running
> > com.cloud.utils.testcase.NioTest
> > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,860 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Test
> > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,913 INFO  [utils.nio.NioServer]
> > (NioTestServer-Selector:) NioConnection started and listening on
> > 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:
> >
> > I usually just wait for this point in the build and if it halts, then
> > I CTRL-C and try again.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > --
> > *Mike Tutkowski*
> > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> > o: 303.746.7302
> > Advancing the way the world uses the
> > cloud
> > *(tm)*
> >
>
>
>
> --
> *Mike Tutkowski*
> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the
> cloud
> *(tm)*
>



-- 
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud
*™*

Re: Orphaned libvirt storage pools

[Wei ZHOU]

Wido,

Could you tell me the libvirt version?
For our platform with this issue, the libvirt version is 0.9.13

-Wei


2013/6/7 Marcus Sorensen 

> There is already quite a bit of logging around this stuff, for example:
>
> s_logger.error("deleteStoragePool removed pool from
> libvirt, but libvirt had trouble"
>+ "unmounting the pool. Trying umount
> location " + targetPath
>+ "again in a few seconds");
>
> And if it gets an error from libvirt during create stating that the
> mountpoint is in use, agent attempts to unmount before remounting. Of
> course this would fail if it is in use.
>
> // if error is that pool is mounted, try to handle it
> if (e.toString().contains("already mounted")) {
> s_logger.error("Attempting to unmount old mount
> libvirt is unaware of at "+targetPath);
> String result = Script.runSimpleBashScript("umount " +
> targetPath );
> if (result == null) {
> s_logger.error("Succeeded in unmounting " +
> targetPath);
> try {
> sp = conn.storagePoolCreateXML(spd.toString(), 0);
> s_logger.error("Succeeded in redefining storage");
> return sp;
> } catch (LibvirtException l) {
> s_logger.error("Target was already mounted,
> unmounted it but failed to redefine storage:" + l);
> }
> } else {
> s_logger.error("Failed in unmounting and
> redefining storage");
> }
> }
>
>
> Do you think it was related to the upgrade process itself (e.g. maybe
> the storage pools didn't carry across the libvirt upgrade)? Can you
> duplicate outside of the upgrade?
>
> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Wido den Hollander  wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >
> > On 06/07/2013 04:30 PM, Marcus Sorensen wrote:
> >>
> >> Does this only happen with isos?
> >
> >
> > Yes, it does.
> >
> > My work-around for now was to locate all the Instances who had these ISOs
> > attached and detach them from all (~100 instances..)
> >
> > Then I manually unmounted all the mountpoints under /mnt so that they
> can be
> > re-used again.
> >
> > This cluster was upgraded to 4.1 from 4.0 with libvirt 1.0.2 (coming from
> > 0.9.8).
> >
> > Somehow libvirt forgot about these storage pools.
> >
> > Wido
> >
> >> On Jun 7, 2013 8:15 AM, "Wido den Hollander"  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> So, I just created CLOUDSTACK-2893, but Wei Zhou mentioned that there
> are
> >>> some related issues:
> >>> * CLOUDSTACK-2729
> >>> * CLOUDSTACK-2780
> >>>
> >>> I restarted my Agent and the issue described in 2893 went away, but I'm
> >>> wondering how that happened.
> >>>
> >>> Anyway, after going further I found that I have some "orphaned" storage
> >>> pools, with that I mean, they are mounted and in use, but not defined
> nor
> >>> active in libvirt:
> >>>
> >>> root@n02:~# lsof |grep "\.iso"|awk '{print $9}'|cut -d '/' -f 3|sort
> >>> -n|uniq
> >>> eb3cd8fd-a462-35b9-882a-**f4b9f2f4a84c
> >>> f84e51ab-d203-3114-b581-**247b81b7d2c1
> >>> fd968b03-bd11-3179-a2b3-**73def7c66c68
> >>> 7ceb73e5-5ab1-3862-ad6e-**52cb986aff0d
> >>> 7dc0149e-0281-3353-91eb-**4589ef2b1ec1
> >>> 8e005344-6a65-3802-ab36-**31befc95abf3
> >>> 88ddd8f5-e6c7-3f3d-bef2-**eea8f33aa593
> >>> 765e63d7-e9f9-3203-bf4f-**e55f83fe9177
> >>> 1287a27d-0383-3f5a-84aa-**61211621d451
> >>> 98622150-41b2-3ba3-9c9c-**09e3b6a2da03
> >>>
> >>> root@n02:~#
> >>>
> >>> Looking at libvirt:
> >>> root@n02:~# virsh pool-list
> >>> Name State  Autostart
> >>> --**---
> >>> 52801816-fe44-3a2b-a147-**bb768eeea295 active no
> >>> 7ceb73e5-5ab1-3862-ad6e-**52cb986aff0d active no
> >>> 88ddd8f5-e6c7-3f3d-bef2-**eea8f33aa593 active no
> >>> a83d1100-4ffa-432a-8467-**4dc266c4b0c8 active no
> >>> fd968b03-bd11-3179-a2b3-**73def7c66c68 active no
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> root@n02:~#
> >>>
> >>> What happens here is that the mountpoints are in use (ISO attached to
> >>> Instance) but there is no storage pool in libvirt.
> >>>
> >>> This means that when you try to deploy a second VM with the same ISO
> >>> libvirt will error out since the Agent will try to create and start a
> new
> >>> storage pool which will fail since the mountpoint is already in use.
> >>>
> >>> The remedy would be to take the hypervisor into maintainence, reboot
> int
> >>> completely and migrate Instances to it again.
> >>>
> >>> In libvirt there is no way to start a NFS storage pool without libvirt
> >>> mounting it.
> >>>
> >>> Any suggestions on how we can work around this code wise?
> >>>
> >>> For my issue I'm writing a patch which adds some more debug lines to
> show
> >>> what the Agent is doing, but it's kind of weird that we got into this
> >>> "disconnected" state.
> >>>
> >>> Wido
> >>>
> >>

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[John Burwell]

Mike,

I just realized that I forgot to publish my review.  I am offline ATM,
but I will publish it in the next couple of hours.

Do you plan to update your the patch in Review Board?

Sorry for the oversight,
-John




On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:26 AM, Mike Tutkowski
 wrote:

> Hi Edison, John, and Wei (and whoever else is reading this :) ),
>
> Just an FYI that I believe I have implemented all the areas we wanted
> addressed.
>
> I plan to review the code again tomorrow morning or afternoon, then send in
> another patch.
>
> Thanks for all the work on this everyone!
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>
>> Sure, that sounds good.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Wei ZHOU  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Mike,
>>>
>>> It looks the two feature do not have many conflicts in Java code, except
>>> the cloudstack UI.
>>> If you do not mind, I will merge disk_io_throttling branch into master
>>> this
>>> week, so that you can develop based on it.
>>>
>>> -Wei
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/6/11 Mike Tutkowski 
>>>
 Hey John,

 The SolidFire patch does not depend on the object_store branch, but - as
 Edison mentioned - it might be easier if we merge the SolidFire branch
>>> into
 the object_store branch before object_store goes into master.

 I'm not sure how the disk_io_throttling fits into this merge strategy.
 Perhaps Wei can chime in on that.


 On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:07 AM, John Burwell 
>>> wrote:

> Mike,
>
> We have a delicate merge dance to perform.  The disk_io_throttling,
> solidfire, and object_store appear to have a number of overlapping
> elements.  I understand the dependencies between the patches to be as
> follows:
>
>object_store <- solidfire -> disk_io_throttling
>
> Am I correct that the device management aspects of SolidFire are
>>> additive
> to the object_store branch or there are circular dependency between
>>> the
> branches?  Once we understand the dependency graph, we can determine
>>> the
> best approach to land the changes in master.
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
>
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 11:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
 mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Also, if we are good with Edison merging my code into his branch
>>> before
>> going into master, I am good with that.
>>
>> We can remove the StoragePoolType.Dynamic code after his merge and
>>> we
 can
>> deal with Burst IOPS then, as well.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Let me make sure I follow where we're going here:
>>>
>>> 1) There should be NO references to hypervisor code in the storage
>>> plug-ins code (this includes the default storage plug-in, which
> currently
>>> sends several commands to the hypervisor in use (although it does
>>> not
> know
>>> which hypervisor (XenServer, ESX(i), etc.) is actually in use))
>>>
>>> 2) managed=true or managed=false can be placed in the url field (if
 not
>>> present, we default to false). This info is stored in the
>>> storage_pool_details table.
>>>
>>> 3) When the "attach" command is sent to the hypervisor in
>>> question, we
>>> pass the managed property along (this takes the place of the
>>> StoragePoolType.Dynamic check).
>>>
>>> 4) execute(AttachVolumeCommand) in the hypervisor checks for the
 managed
>>> property. If true for an attach, the necessary hypervisor data
> structure is
>>> created and the rest of the attach command executes to attach the
> volume.
>>>
>>> 5) When execute(AttachVolumeCommand) is invoked to detach a volume,
 the
>>> same check is made. If managed, the hypervisor data structure is
> removed.
>>>
>>> 6) I do not see an clear way to support Burst IOPS in 4.2 unless
>>> it is
>>> stored in the volumes and disk_offerings table. If we have some
>>> idea,
>>> that'd be cool.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:58 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>>>
 "+1 -- Burst IOPS can be implemented while avoiding implementation
 attributes.  I always wondered about the details field.  I think
>>> we
> should
 beef up the description in the documentation regarding the
>>> expected
> format
 of the field.  In 4.1, I noticed that the details are not
>>> returned on
> the
 createStoratePool updateStoragePool, or listStoragePool response.
 Why
 don't we return it?  It seems like it would be useful for clients
>>> to
 be
 able to inspect the contents of the details field."

 Not sure how this would work storing Burst IOPS here.

 Burst IOPS need to be variable on a Disk Offe

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[Mike Tutkowski]

No problem, John.

I still want to re-review it by myself before coming up with a new patch
file.

Also, maybe I should first wait for Wei's changes to be checked in and
merge those into mine before generating a new patch file?


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:40 AM, John Burwell  wrote:

> Mike,
>
> I just realized that I forgot to publish my review.  I am offline ATM,
> but I will publish it in the next couple of hours.
>
> Do you plan to update your the patch in Review Board?
>
> Sorry for the oversight,
> -John
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:26 AM, Mike Tutkowski
>  wrote:
>
> > Hi Edison, John, and Wei (and whoever else is reading this :) ),
> >
> > Just an FYI that I believe I have implemented all the areas we wanted
> > addressed.
> >
> > I plan to review the code again tomorrow morning or afternoon, then send
> in
> > another patch.
> >
> > Thanks for all the work on this everyone!
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Sure, that sounds good.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Wei ZHOU 
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Mike,
> >>>
> >>> It looks the two feature do not have many conflicts in Java code,
> except
> >>> the cloudstack UI.
> >>> If you do not mind, I will merge disk_io_throttling branch into master
> >>> this
> >>> week, so that you can develop based on it.
> >>>
> >>> -Wei
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2013/6/11 Mike Tutkowski 
> >>>
>  Hey John,
> 
>  The SolidFire patch does not depend on the object_store branch, but -
> as
>  Edison mentioned - it might be easier if we merge the SolidFire branch
> >>> into
>  the object_store branch before object_store goes into master.
> 
>  I'm not sure how the disk_io_throttling fits into this merge strategy.
>  Perhaps Wei can chime in on that.
> 
> 
>  On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:07 AM, John Burwell 
> >>> wrote:
> 
> > Mike,
> >
> > We have a delicate merge dance to perform.  The disk_io_throttling,
> > solidfire, and object_store appear to have a number of overlapping
> > elements.  I understand the dependencies between the patches to be as
> > follows:
> >
> >object_store <- solidfire -> disk_io_throttling
> >
> > Am I correct that the device management aspects of SolidFire are
> >>> additive
> > to the object_store branch or there are circular dependency between
> >>> the
> > branches?  Once we understand the dependency graph, we can determine
> >>> the
> > best approach to land the changes in master.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -John
> >
> >
> > On Jun 10, 2013, at 11:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>  mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Also, if we are good with Edison merging my code into his branch
> >>> before
> >> going into master, I am good with that.
> >>
> >> We can remove the StoragePoolType.Dynamic code after his merge and
> >>> we
>  can
> >> deal with Burst IOPS then, as well.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> >> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Let me make sure I follow where we're going here:
> >>>
> >>> 1) There should be NO references to hypervisor code in the storage
> >>> plug-ins code (this includes the default storage plug-in, which
> > currently
> >>> sends several commands to the hypervisor in use (although it does
> >>> not
> > know
> >>> which hypervisor (XenServer, ESX(i), etc.) is actually in use))
> >>>
> >>> 2) managed=true or managed=false can be placed in the url field (if
>  not
> >>> present, we default to false). This info is stored in the
> >>> storage_pool_details table.
> >>>
> >>> 3) When the "attach" command is sent to the hypervisor in
> >>> question, we
> >>> pass the managed property along (this takes the place of the
> >>> StoragePoolType.Dynamic check).
> >>>
> >>> 4) execute(AttachVolumeCommand) in the hypervisor checks for the
>  managed
> >>> property. If true for an attach, the necessary hypervisor data
> > structure is
> >>> created and the rest of the attach command executes to attach the
> > volume.
> >>>
> >>> 5) When execute(AttachVolumeCommand) is invoked to detach a volume,
>  the
> >>> same check is made. If managed, the hypervisor data structure is
> > removed.
> >>>
> >>> 6) I do not see an clear way to support Burst IOPS in 4.2 unless
> >>> it is
> >>> stored in the volumes and disk_offerings table. If we have some
> >>> idea,
> >>> that'd be cool.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 8:58 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> >>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >>>
>  "+1 -- Burst IOPS can be implemented while avoiding implementation
>  attributes.  I always wondered about the details field.  I think

Re: Orphaned libvirt storage pools

[Wido den Hollander]

Hi Wei,

This was with both 0.9.8 as with 1.0.2

Haven't been able to dig into this deeper yet.

Wido

On 06/12/2013 06:26 PM, Wei ZHOU wrote:

Wido,

Could you tell me the libvirt version?
For our platform with this issue, the libvirt version is 0.9.13

-Wei


2013/6/7 Marcus Sorensen 


There is already quite a bit of logging around this stuff, for example:

 s_logger.error("deleteStoragePool removed pool from
libvirt, but libvirt had trouble"
+ "unmounting the pool. Trying umount
location " + targetPath
+ "again in a few seconds");

And if it gets an error from libvirt during create stating that the
mountpoint is in use, agent attempts to unmount before remounting. Of
course this would fail if it is in use.

 // if error is that pool is mounted, try to handle it
 if (e.toString().contains("already mounted")) {
 s_logger.error("Attempting to unmount old mount
libvirt is unaware of at "+targetPath);
 String result = Script.runSimpleBashScript("umount " +
targetPath );
 if (result == null) {
 s_logger.error("Succeeded in unmounting " +
targetPath);
 try {
 sp = conn.storagePoolCreateXML(spd.toString(), 0);
 s_logger.error("Succeeded in redefining storage");
 return sp;
 } catch (LibvirtException l) {
 s_logger.error("Target was already mounted,
unmounted it but failed to redefine storage:" + l);
 }
 } else {
 s_logger.error("Failed in unmounting and
redefining storage");
 }
 }


Do you think it was related to the upgrade process itself (e.g. maybe
the storage pools didn't carry across the libvirt upgrade)? Can you
duplicate outside of the upgrade?

On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 8:43 AM, Wido den Hollander  wrote:

Hi,


On 06/07/2013 04:30 PM, Marcus Sorensen wrote:


Does this only happen with isos?



Yes, it does.

My work-around for now was to locate all the Instances who had these ISOs
attached and detach them from all (~100 instances..)

Then I manually unmounted all the mountpoints under /mnt so that they

can be

re-used again.

This cluster was upgraded to 4.1 from 4.0 with libvirt 1.0.2 (coming from
0.9.8).

Somehow libvirt forgot about these storage pools.

Wido


On Jun 7, 2013 8:15 AM, "Wido den Hollander"  wrote:


Hi,

So, I just created CLOUDSTACK-2893, but Wei Zhou mentioned that there

are

some related issues:
* CLOUDSTACK-2729
* CLOUDSTACK-2780

I restarted my Agent and the issue described in 2893 went away, but I'm
wondering how that happened.

Anyway, after going further I found that I have some "orphaned" storage
pools, with that I mean, they are mounted and in use, but not defined

nor

active in libvirt:

root@n02:~# lsof |grep "\.iso"|awk '{print $9}'|cut -d '/' -f 3|sort
-n|uniq
eb3cd8fd-a462-35b9-882a-**f4b9f2f4a84c
f84e51ab-d203-3114-b581-**247b81b7d2c1
fd968b03-bd11-3179-a2b3-**73def7c66c68
7ceb73e5-5ab1-3862-ad6e-**52cb986aff0d
7dc0149e-0281-3353-91eb-**4589ef2b1ec1
8e005344-6a65-3802-ab36-**31befc95abf3
88ddd8f5-e6c7-3f3d-bef2-**eea8f33aa593
765e63d7-e9f9-3203-bf4f-**e55f83fe9177
1287a27d-0383-3f5a-84aa-**61211621d451
98622150-41b2-3ba3-9c9c-**09e3b6a2da03

root@n02:~#

Looking at libvirt:
root@n02:~# virsh pool-list
Name State  Autostart
--**---
52801816-fe44-3a2b-a147-**bb768eeea295 active no
7ceb73e5-5ab1-3862-ad6e-**52cb986aff0d active no
88ddd8f5-e6c7-3f3d-bef2-**eea8f33aa593 active no
a83d1100-4ffa-432a-8467-**4dc266c4b0c8 active no
fd968b03-bd11-3179-a2b3-**73def7c66c68 active no


root@n02:~#

What happens here is that the mountpoints are in use (ISO attached to
Instance) but there is no storage pool in libvirt.

This means that when you try to deploy a second VM with the same ISO
libvirt will error out since the Agent will try to create and start a

new

storage pool which will fail since the mountpoint is already in use.

The remedy would be to take the hypervisor into maintainence, reboot

int

completely and migrate Instances to it again.

In libvirt there is no way to start a NFS storage pool without libvirt
mounting it.

Any suggestions on how we can work around this code wise?

For my issue I'm writing a patch which adds some more debug lines to

show

what the Agent is doing, but it's kind of weird that we got into this
"disconnected" state.

Wido

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[John Burwell]

Mike,

How have Wei and you resolved the issue of conflicting QoS mechanisms
between the Hypervisor and Storage layers?  Have the affected FSs been
updated with that decision?

In terms of merge timing, can you describe the dependencies between the patches?

Thanks,
-John




On Jun 12, 2013, at 12:43 PM, Mike Tutkowski
 wrote:

> No problem, John.
>
> I still want to re-review it by myself before coming up with a new patch
> file.
>
> Also, maybe I should first wait for Wei's changes to be checked in and
> merge those into mine before generating a new patch file?
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:40 AM, John Burwell  wrote:
>
>> Mike,
>>
>> I just realized that I forgot to publish my review.  I am offline ATM,
>> but I will publish it in the next couple of hours.
>>
>> Do you plan to update your the patch in Review Board?
>>
>> Sorry for the oversight,
>> -John
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:26 AM, Mike Tutkowski
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Edison, John, and Wei (and whoever else is reading this :) ),
>>>
>>> Just an FYI that I believe I have implemented all the areas we wanted
>>> addressed.
>>>
>>> I plan to review the code again tomorrow morning or afternoon, then send
>> in
>>> another patch.
>>>
>>> Thanks for all the work on this everyone!
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>>>
 Sure, that sounds good.


 On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Wei ZHOU 
>> wrote:

> Hi Mike,
>
> It looks the two feature do not have many conflicts in Java code,
>> except
> the cloudstack UI.
> If you do not mind, I will merge disk_io_throttling branch into master
> this
> week, so that you can develop based on it.
>
> -Wei
>
>
> 2013/6/11 Mike Tutkowski 
>
>> Hey John,
>>
>> The SolidFire patch does not depend on the object_store branch, but -
>> as
>> Edison mentioned - it might be easier if we merge the SolidFire branch
> into
>> the object_store branch before object_store goes into master.
>>
>> I'm not sure how the disk_io_throttling fits into this merge strategy.
>> Perhaps Wei can chime in on that.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:07 AM, John Burwell 
> wrote:
>>
>>> Mike,
>>>
>>> We have a delicate merge dance to perform.  The disk_io_throttling,
>>> solidfire, and object_store appear to have a number of overlapping
>>> elements.  I understand the dependencies between the patches to be as
>>> follows:
>>>
>>>   object_store <- solidfire -> disk_io_throttling
>>>
>>> Am I correct that the device management aspects of SolidFire are
> additive
>>> to the object_store branch or there are circular dependency between
> the
>>> branches?  Once we understand the dependency graph, we can determine
> the
>>> best approach to land the changes in master.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -John
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 10, 2013, at 11:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Also, if we are good with Edison merging my code into his branch
> before
 going into master, I am good with that.

 We can remove the StoragePoolType.Dynamic code after his merge and
> we
>> can
 deal with Burst IOPS then, as well.


 On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
 mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:

> Let me make sure I follow where we're going here:
>
> 1) There should be NO references to hypervisor code in the storage
> plug-ins code (this includes the default storage plug-in, which
>>> currently
> sends several commands to the hypervisor in use (although it does
> not
>>> know
> which hypervisor (XenServer, ESX(i), etc.) is actually in use))
>
> 2) managed=true or managed=false can be placed in the url field (if
>> not
> present, we default to false). This info is stored in the
> storage_pool_details table.
>
> 3) When the "attach" command is sent to the hypervisor in
> question, we
> pass the managed property along (this takes the place of the
> StoragePoolType.Dynamic check).
>
> 4) execute(AttachVolumeCommand) in the hypervisor checks for the
>> managed
> property. If true for an attach, the necessary hypervisor data
>>> structure is
> created and the rest of the attach command executes to attach the
>>> volume.
>
> 5) When execute(AttachVolumeCommand) is invoked to detach a volume,
>> the
> same check is made. If managed, the hypervisor data structure is
>>> removed.
>
> 6) I do not see an clear way to support Burst IOPS in 4.2 unless
> it is
> stored in the volumes and disk_offerings table. If we

RE: Chip and David elected ASF Members

[Animesh Chaturvedi]

Congratulations Chip and David. 



> -Original Message-
> From: Mohammad Nour El-Din [mailto:nour.moham...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 1:37 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Chip and David elected ASF Members
> 
> Congrats ;)
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Sebastien Goasguen
> wrote:
> 
> > Congratulations to Chip and David for being elected members of the
> ASF:
> >
> >
> >
> https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation
> _welcomes2
> >
> > -Sebastien
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Thanks
> - Mohammad Nour
> 
> "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep
> moving"
> - Albert Einstein

Re: Chip and David elected ASF Members

[John Burwell]

Big congrats to Chip and David, and a great addition to ASF.




On Jun 12, 2013, at 1:01 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi
 wrote:

> Congratulations Chip and David.
>
>
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Mohammad Nour El-Din [mailto:nour.moham...@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 1:37 AM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Chip and David elected ASF Members
>>
>> Congrats ;)
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Sebastien Goasguen
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Congratulations to Chip and David for being elected members of the
>> ASF:
>> https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation
>> _welcomes2
>>>
>>> -Sebastien
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thanks
>> - Mohammad Nour
>> 
>> "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep
>> moving"
>> - Albert Einstein

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[Mike Tutkowski]

Hi John,

Wei and I have discussed making the two features mutually exclusive. We
agree with you that only one should be active at a time. We plan to
implement in the GUI a mechanism (maybe radio buttons) to turn his feature
on and mine off and vice versa.

I was thinking if I wait until he checks in his code, then I update and
merge that I will be the person resolving merge conflicts in the JavaScript
code (there shouldn't be a problem in the Java code) as opposed to putting
that work on someone else.

Let me know what you think.

Oh, was going to ask you what "FS" stands for here.

Thanks!


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:56 AM, John Burwell  wrote:

> Mike,
>
> How have Wei and you resolved the issue of conflicting QoS mechanisms
> between the Hypervisor and Storage layers?  Have the affected FSs been
> updated with that decision?
>
> In terms of merge timing, can you describe the dependencies between the
> patches?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 12:43 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>  wrote:
>
> > No problem, John.
> >
> > I still want to re-review it by myself before coming up with a new patch
> > file.
> >
> > Also, maybe I should first wait for Wei's changes to be checked in and
> > merge those into mine before generating a new patch file?
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:40 AM, John Burwell 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Mike,
> >>
> >> I just realized that I forgot to publish my review.  I am offline ATM,
> >> but I will publish it in the next couple of hours.
> >>
> >> Do you plan to update your the patch in Review Board?
> >>
> >> Sorry for the oversight,
> >> -John
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:26 AM, Mike Tutkowski
> >>  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Edison, John, and Wei (and whoever else is reading this :) ),
> >>>
> >>> Just an FYI that I believe I have implemented all the areas we wanted
> >>> addressed.
> >>>
> >>> I plan to review the code again tomorrow morning or afternoon, then
> send
> >> in
> >>> another patch.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for all the work on this everyone!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> >>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >>>
>  Sure, that sounds good.
> 
> 
>  On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Wei ZHOU 
> >> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Mike,
> >
> > It looks the two feature do not have many conflicts in Java code,
> >> except
> > the cloudstack UI.
> > If you do not mind, I will merge disk_io_throttling branch into
> master
> > this
> > week, so that you can develop based on it.
> >
> > -Wei
> >
> >
> > 2013/6/11 Mike Tutkowski 
> >
> >> Hey John,
> >>
> >> The SolidFire patch does not depend on the object_store branch, but
> -
> >> as
> >> Edison mentioned - it might be easier if we merge the SolidFire
> branch
> > into
> >> the object_store branch before object_store goes into master.
> >>
> >> I'm not sure how the disk_io_throttling fits into this merge
> strategy.
> >> Perhaps Wei can chime in on that.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:07 AM, John Burwell 
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>> Mike,
> >>>
> >>> We have a delicate merge dance to perform.  The disk_io_throttling,
> >>> solidfire, and object_store appear to have a number of overlapping
> >>> elements.  I understand the dependencies between the patches to be
> as
> >>> follows:
> >>>
> >>>   object_store <- solidfire -> disk_io_throttling
> >>>
> >>> Am I correct that the device management aspects of SolidFire are
> > additive
> >>> to the object_store branch or there are circular dependency between
> > the
> >>> branches?  Once we understand the dependency graph, we can
> determine
> > the
> >>> best approach to land the changes in master.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> -John
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Jun 10, 2013, at 11:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> >> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
>  Also, if we are good with Edison merging my code into his branch
> > before
>  going into master, I am good with that.
> 
>  We can remove the StoragePoolType.Dynamic code after his merge and
> > we
> >> can
>  deal with Burst IOPS then, as well.
> 
> 
>  On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>  mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> 
> > Let me make sure I follow where we're going here:
> >
> > 1) There should be NO references to hypervisor code in the
> storage
> > plug-ins code (this includes the default storage plug-in, which
> >>> currently
> > sends several commands to the hypervisor in use (although it does
> > not
> >>> know
> > which hypervisor (XenServer, ESX(i), etc.) is actually in use))
> >
> > 2) managed=true or managed=false can be placed in the url field
> (if
> >

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[John Burwell]

Mike,

Are the checks only implemented in the UI?

Thanks,
-John




On Jun 12, 2013, at 1:02 PM, Mike Tutkowski
 wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> Wei and I have discussed making the two features mutually exclusive. We
> agree with you that only one should be active at a time. We plan to
> implement in the GUI a mechanism (maybe radio buttons) to turn his feature
> on and mine off and vice versa.
>
> I was thinking if I wait until he checks in his code, then I update and
> merge that I will be the person resolving merge conflicts in the JavaScript
> code (there shouldn't be a problem in the Java code) as opposed to putting
> that work on someone else.
>
> Let me know what you think.
>
> Oh, was going to ask you what "FS" stands for here.
>
> Thanks!
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:56 AM, John Burwell  wrote:
>
>> Mike,
>>
>> How have Wei and you resolved the issue of conflicting QoS mechanisms
>> between the Hypervisor and Storage layers?  Have the affected FSs been
>> updated with that decision?
>>
>> In terms of merge timing, can you describe the dependencies between the
>> patches?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> -John
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jun 12, 2013, at 12:43 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> No problem, John.
>>>
>>> I still want to re-review it by myself before coming up with a new patch
>>> file.
>>>
>>> Also, maybe I should first wait for Wei's changes to be checked in and
>>> merge those into mine before generating a new patch file?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:40 AM, John Burwell 
>> wrote:
>>>
 Mike,

 I just realized that I forgot to publish my review.  I am offline ATM,
 but I will publish it in the next couple of hours.

 Do you plan to update your the patch in Review Board?

 Sorry for the oversight,
 -John




 On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:26 AM, Mike Tutkowski
  wrote:

> Hi Edison, John, and Wei (and whoever else is reading this :) ),
>
> Just an FYI that I believe I have implemented all the areas we wanted
> addressed.
>
> I plan to review the code again tomorrow morning or afternoon, then
>> send
 in
> another patch.
>
> Thanks for all the work on this everyone!
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>
>> Sure, that sounds good.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Wei ZHOU 
 wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Mike,
>>>
>>> It looks the two feature do not have many conflicts in Java code,
 except
>>> the cloudstack UI.
>>> If you do not mind, I will merge disk_io_throttling branch into
>> master
>>> this
>>> week, so that you can develop based on it.
>>>
>>> -Wei
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/6/11 Mike Tutkowski 
>>>
 Hey John,

 The SolidFire patch does not depend on the object_store branch, but
>> -
 as
 Edison mentioned - it might be easier if we merge the SolidFire
>> branch
>>> into
 the object_store branch before object_store goes into master.

 I'm not sure how the disk_io_throttling fits into this merge
>> strategy.
 Perhaps Wei can chime in on that.


 On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:07 AM, John Burwell 
>>> wrote:

> Mike,
>
> We have a delicate merge dance to perform.  The disk_io_throttling,
> solidfire, and object_store appear to have a number of overlapping
> elements.  I understand the dependencies between the patches to be
>> as
> follows:
>
>  object_store <- solidfire -> disk_io_throttling
>
> Am I correct that the device management aspects of SolidFire are
>>> additive
> to the object_store branch or there are circular dependency between
>>> the
> branches?  Once we understand the dependency graph, we can
>> determine
>>> the
> best approach to land the changes in master.
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
>
> On Jun 10, 2013, at 11:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
 mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Also, if we are good with Edison merging my code into his branch
>>> before
>> going into master, I am good with that.
>>
>> We can remove the StoragePoolType.Dynamic code after his merge and
>>> we
 can
>> deal with Burst IOPS then, as well.
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Let me make sure I follow where we're going here:
>>>
>>> 1) There should be NO references to hypervisor code in the
>> storage
>>> plug-ins code (this includes the default storage plug-in, which
> currently
>>> sends several commands to the hypervisor in use (although it does
>>> not
> 

RE: [Discuss][Proposal] Configurable option for egress firewall rules default policy

[Sanjeev Neelarapu]

+1

Mathias Mullins  wrote:


VERY +1 on this feature.


From: Chip Childers [chip.child...@sungard.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 9:18 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: Chiradeep Vittal
Subject: Re: [Discuss][Proposal] Configurable option for  egress firewall rules 
default policy

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:58:14AM +, Jayapal Reddy Uradi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> The current egress firewall rule feature by default BLOCK the all the 
> outgoing traffic if there are no user configured rules.
>
> I am proposing configurable option for the egress firewall rules using the 
> Network offering.
> In network offering for firewall service provider, user can select egress 
> default policy to allow/deny.
>
> Here is bug# https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1578
>
> Please find below FS.
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Egress+firewall+rules+-+Ability+to+change+the+default
>
> Please provide your comments.
>
> Thanks,
> Jayapal

+1 to this feature

Re: [Discuss][Proposal] Configurable option for egress firewall rules default policy

[Wei ZHOU]

+1


-Wei


2013/6/12 Sanjeev Neelarapu 

> +1
>
> Mathias Mullins  wrote:
>
>
> VERY +1 on this feature.
>
> 
> From: Chip Childers [chip.child...@sungard.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 9:18 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: Chiradeep Vittal
> Subject: Re: [Discuss][Proposal] Configurable option for  egress firewall
> rules default policy
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:58:14AM +, Jayapal Reddy Uradi wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > The current egress firewall rule feature by default BLOCK the all the
> outgoing traffic if there are no user configured rules.
> >
> > I am proposing configurable option for the egress firewall rules using
> the Network offering.
> > In network offering for firewall service provider, user can select
> egress default policy to allow/deny.
> >
> > Here is bug# https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1578
> >
> > Please find below FS.
> >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Egress+firewall+rules+-+Ability+to+change+the+default
> >
> > Please provide your comments.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jayapal
>
> +1 to this feature
>

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-1960: Key remapping fails to input the keys \ | ? of UK Keyboard

[Fang Wang]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11650/#review21807
---

Ship it!


Ship It!

- Fang Wang


On June 5, 2013, 8:09 a.m., Sanjay Tripathi wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/11650/
> ---
> 
> (Updated June 5, 2013, 8:09 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack, Devdeep Singh and Fang Wang.
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> CLOUDSTACK-1960 Key remapping fails to input the keys \ | ? of UK Keyboard
> 
> This patch fixes  " ¦ " key for IE browser. 
> 
> 
> This addresses bug CLOUDSTACK-1960.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   services/console-proxy/server/js/ajaxkeys.js 5f497bb 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11650/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> Verified on local CloudStack setup.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Sanjay Tripathi
> 
>

Summary of IRC meeting in #cloudstack-meeting, Wed Jun 12 17:08:56 2013

[ASF IRC Services]

Members present: Animesh, sudhap, dahn, topcloud, kelveny, chipc, ke4qqq, jzb


Meeting summary:


1. Preface

2. Active Feature Release: Overall Status

3. Active Feature Release QA Status

4. Active Feature Release: Doc Status

5. Active Feature Release: Additional Issues

6. Active Bug Fix Release: 4.1.1 

7. Master Branch

8. Infra

9. Other topics?

IRC log follows:


# 1. Preface #


# 2. Active Feature Release: Overall Status #
17:09:36 [jzb]: what do we have on the 4.2.0 status?
17:09:43 [dahn]: chipc: thanks, will read it
17:09:56 [kelveny]: we are targeting to merge vmsync branch 
17:09:56 [Animesh]: On 4.2 there are many open defects
17:10:04 [Animesh]: kelven go ahead
17:10:25 [kelveny]: code changes is targeted to complete by the end of this week
17:10:42 [kelveny]: after that official merge request will be sent to the list
17:11:06 [kelveny]: actually merge may happen at next week if no objections
17:11:26 [chipc]: kelveny: I'm curious about what testing is happening on that 
branch
17:11:44 [ke4qqq]: BVT at least? 
17:11:51 [kelveny]: we will try to setup BVT test on the branch
17:12:16 [chipc]: that seems like a pre-requisite to merge, when I look at the 
complexity of the work
17:12:22 [chipc]: so +1 to that!
17:12:41 [kelveny]: most of infrastructure tests are already done through unit 
tests
17:13:18 [chipc]: sweet!
17:13:38 [kelveny]: but we do have refactoring changes in areas that is not 
possible for unit test, will rely on BVT for integration test
17:13:43 [chipc]: BTW - that's a really good FS...  it made it possible to grok 
the changes
17:13:58 [chipc]: (or at least most of them)
17:15:13 [kelveny]: that's pretty much the update from my side
17:15:21 [jzb]: thanks kelveny 
17:15:28 [jzb]: Animesh: did you have more?
17:15:56 [Animesh]: yes the defect resolution rate has been more than the 
incoming defects so looks like we are getting better
17:16:39 [Animesh]: but still we have large number of open defects, Sudha will 
also share test results to help everyone guage our readiness
17:17:37 [dahn]: newbee question about defects, please
17:17:58 [Animesh]: dahn: sure what's the question?
17:18:14 [dahn]: If i use an api in master, and it breaks after an update do I 
report a defect in jira ?
17:18:22 [dahn]: or talk to someone off line
17:18:27 [dahn]: or the list?
17:18:40 [Animesh]: filing a defect is best
17:18:53 [jzb]: dahn: is it an API that also works in a release?
17:19:11 [jzb]: I wouldn't necessarily say something's a defect if an API 
changes in master. 
17:19:17 [jzb]: that isn't in a release.
17:19:35 [dahn]: jzb: I have to investigate. I think so
17:19:43 [dahn]: Animesh: does that mean jira?\
17:19:54 [jzb]: dahn: OK. then what Animesh said. :-)
17:19:59 [Animesh]: dahn: yes we use JIRA for defect tracking
17:20:00 [topcloud]: that should be a bug.  comparing it to a previous release 
provides details to a bug.
17:20:21 [topcloud]: we shouldn't treat master different.
17:20:49 [dahn]: thanks, all
17:20:56 [dahn]: you will hear of me
17:22:13 [Animesh]: continuing on the release, I will encourage folks to check 
on 4.2 Release dashboard
17:22:44 [Animesh]: I will send out my weekly reminder today on status and 
include Sudha's test results 
17:23:28 [topcloud]: one thing that concerns me is that the bvt continues to be 
at < 100% pass rate
17:23:41 [topcloud]: is there anything we're doing about this?
17:23:47 [Animesh]: After the feature freeze date 6/28 i will send out daily 
emails since we need focused activity to resolve and close our back log of 
defects
17:24:44 [Animesh]: topcloud: on bvt issues rayees and other have been filing 
defects that are triaged daily
17:25:20 [chipc]: topcloud: was BVT ever at 100% ?
17:25:32 [chipc]: (real question, not sarcasm)
17:25:44 [topcloud]: chipc: to my understanding, it was at one point >95%
17:26:17 [sudhap]: Yes - they were 100% before 4.1 but since then we never had 
100%
17:26:41 [chipc]: once we get it back to 100%, I say we block all changes when 
it drops to <100%
17:26:49 [topcloud]: +1
17:26:56 [chipc]: anyway, that was a distraction from the 4.2.0 topic
17:26:59 [chipc]: (sort of)
17:27:25 [jzb]: anything else on 4.2.0 overall status?
17:27:37 [topcloud]: not really...I think bvt not being at 100% is a big part 
of why 4.1 was delayed.
17:27:42 [topcloud]: don't want to see it happen for 4.2.
17:28:07 [Animesh]: agreed bvt also shows progress towards release readines
17:28:07 [chipc]: topcloud: +1
17:28:32 [chipc]: Animesh: BVT should show that master is stable, regardless of 
release timeframes
17:28:33 [chipc]: IMO that is
17:28:44 [chipc]: master should only see good  /tested code
17:28:56 [chipc]: but I'm repeating myself I think...  so back to the corner 
for me!
17:28:57 [Animesh]: one more thing on my side was we had a GTM on object_store, 
john burwell took the action item to update the dev-list
17:29:23 [jzb]: OK


# 3. Active Feature Release QA Status #
17:29:59 [jzb]: do 

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[Mike Tutkowski]

Currently they are not yet implemented.

We have to make sure they are implemented in the GUI from a usability
standpoint, but the API must check for consistency and throw an exception
if necessary.


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:03 AM, John Burwell  wrote:

> Mike,
>
> Are the checks only implemented in the UI?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 1:02 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>  wrote:
>
> > Hi John,
> >
> > Wei and I have discussed making the two features mutually exclusive. We
> > agree with you that only one should be active at a time. We plan to
> > implement in the GUI a mechanism (maybe radio buttons) to turn his
> feature
> > on and mine off and vice versa.
> >
> > I was thinking if I wait until he checks in his code, then I update and
> > merge that I will be the person resolving merge conflicts in the
> JavaScript
> > code (there shouldn't be a problem in the Java code) as opposed to
> putting
> > that work on someone else.
> >
> > Let me know what you think.
> >
> > Oh, was going to ask you what "FS" stands for here.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:56 AM, John Burwell 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Mike,
> >>
> >> How have Wei and you resolved the issue of conflicting QoS mechanisms
> >> between the Hypervisor and Storage layers?  Have the affected FSs been
> >> updated with that decision?
> >>
> >> In terms of merge timing, can you describe the dependencies between the
> >> patches?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> -John
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jun 12, 2013, at 12:43 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> >>  wrote:
> >>
> >>> No problem, John.
> >>>
> >>> I still want to re-review it by myself before coming up with a new
> patch
> >>> file.
> >>>
> >>> Also, maybe I should first wait for Wei's changes to be checked in and
> >>> merge those into mine before generating a new patch file?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:40 AM, John Burwell 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
>  Mike,
> 
>  I just realized that I forgot to publish my review.  I am offline ATM,
>  but I will publish it in the next couple of hours.
> 
>  Do you plan to update your the patch in Review Board?
> 
>  Sorry for the oversight,
>  -John
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:26 AM, Mike Tutkowski
>   wrote:
> 
> > Hi Edison, John, and Wei (and whoever else is reading this :) ),
> >
> > Just an FYI that I believe I have implemented all the areas we wanted
> > addressed.
> >
> > I plan to review the code again tomorrow morning or afternoon, then
> >> send
>  in
> > another patch.
> >
> > Thanks for all the work on this everyone!
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Sure, that sounds good.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Wei ZHOU 
>  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Mike,
> >>>
> >>> It looks the two feature do not have many conflicts in Java code,
>  except
> >>> the cloudstack UI.
> >>> If you do not mind, I will merge disk_io_throttling branch into
> >> master
> >>> this
> >>> week, so that you can develop based on it.
> >>>
> >>> -Wei
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 2013/6/11 Mike Tutkowski 
> >>>
>  Hey John,
> 
>  The SolidFire patch does not depend on the object_store branch,
> but
> >> -
>  as
>  Edison mentioned - it might be easier if we merge the SolidFire
> >> branch
> >>> into
>  the object_store branch before object_store goes into master.
> 
>  I'm not sure how the disk_io_throttling fits into this merge
> >> strategy.
>  Perhaps Wei can chime in on that.
> 
> 
>  On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:07 AM, John Burwell <
> jburw...@basho.com>
> >>> wrote:
> 
> > Mike,
> >
> > We have a delicate merge dance to perform.  The
> disk_io_throttling,
> > solidfire, and object_store appear to have a number of
> overlapping
> > elements.  I understand the dependencies between the patches to
> be
> >> as
> > follows:
> >
> >  object_store <- solidfire -> disk_io_throttling
> >
> > Am I correct that the device management aspects of SolidFire are
> >>> additive
> > to the object_store branch or there are circular dependency
> between
> >>> the
> > branches?  Once we understand the dependency graph, we can
> >> determine
> >>> the
> > best approach to land the changes in master.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -John
> >
> >
> > On Jun 10, 2013, at 11:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>  mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Also, if we are good with Edison merging my code into his branch
> >>> before
> >> going into master, I am good with that.
> >>
> >> We ca

Re: Chip and David elected ASF Members

[Mike Tutkowski]

Congratulations, guys!


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:02 AM, John Burwell  wrote:

> Big congrats to Chip and David, and a great addition to ASF.
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 1:01 PM, Animesh Chaturvedi
>  wrote:
>
> > Congratulations Chip and David.
> >
> >
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: Mohammad Nour El-Din [mailto:nour.moham...@gmail.com]
> >> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 1:37 AM
> >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: Chip and David elected ASF Members
> >>
> >> Congrats ;)
> >>
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Sebastien Goasguen
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Congratulations to Chip and David for being elected members of the
> >> ASF:
> >>
> https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation
> >> _welcomes2
> >>>
> >>> -Sebastien
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Thanks
> >> - Mohammad Nour
> >> 
> >> "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep
> >> moving"
> >> - Albert Einstein
>



-- 
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud
*™*

Re: Chip and David elected ASF Members

[Chiradeep Vittal]

Awesome. Congrats Chip and Dave

On 6/12/13 1:31 AM, "Sebastien Goasguen"  wrote:

>Congratulations to Chip and David for being elected members of the ASF:
>
>https://blogs.apache.org/foundation/entry/the_apache_software_foundation_w
>elcomes2
>
>-Sebastien

Want to contribute

[iliyas shirol]

Greetings Team !

Hope you all are doing good. Btw, this is Iliyas an OpenSource evangelist
and Cloud lover :) I have been promoting GNU/Linux and FOSS since when I
was introduced to it. By hobby I write code in BASH and Python. I'm a
regular CloudStack user and have deployed it for multiple customers.

Btw, I want to contribute to the project by code, documentation and
promotion. I'm looking for a mentor who can guide me to bootstrap and start
contributing. We have been evaluating CloudStack 4.1 and have found couple
of small fixes in the BASH scripts and even in the documentation (which can
be an initial assignment for me to fix ;) )

Waiting for a postive response from you folks.

Thanks.

-- 
-
Md. Iliyas Shirol
Mobile : +91 9902 977 800
Google : iliyas.shirol@ gmail.com

London CloudStack Meetup on July 4th

[Mike Tutkowski]

Hi everyone,

I am planning on heading to London to speak at a CloudStack Meetup on July
4th and was curious if anyone on the list was planning on attending, as
well.

I figured this would be a good opportunity to meet more CloudStack people
in person. :)

Talk to you later!

-- 
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud
*™*

Re: Want to contribute

[Joe Brockmeier]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013, at 02:04 PM, iliyas shirol wrote:
> Waiting for a postive response from you folks.

No need to wait, jump right in. (But if you need an "invite," consider
this it.)

Best,

jzb
-- 
Joe Brockmeier
j...@zonker.net
Twitter: @jzb
http://www.dissociatedpress.net/

Re: Want to contribute

[Mohammad Nour El-Din]

Hi Iliyas


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 9:04 PM, iliyas shirol wrote:

> Greetings Team !
>
> Hope you all are doing good. Btw, this is Iliyas an OpenSource evangelist
> and Cloud lover :) I have been promoting GNU/Linux and FOSS since when I
> was introduced to it. By hobby I write code in BASH and Python. I'm a
> regular CloudStack user and have deployed it for multiple customers.
>
> Btw, I want to contribute to the project by code, documentation and
> promotion. I'm looking for a mentor who can guide me to bootstrap and start
> contributing. We have been evaluating CloudStack 4.1 and have found couple
> of small fixes in the BASH scripts and even in the documentation (which can
> be an initial assignment for me to fix ;) )
>

Cool! why don't you start by explaining the bugs that you found and how did
you fix them here and when made sure that they are bugs you can go create
JIRA issues with that and attach the patches. That would be your 1st  step
to help and eventually become a committer if you keep doing that ;)


>
> Waiting for a postive response from you folks.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> -
> Md. Iliyas Shirol
> Mobile : +91 9902 977 800
> Google : iliyas.shirol@ gmail.com
>



-- 
Thanks
- Mohammad Nour

"Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
- Albert Einstein

Re: Want to contribute

[Mike Tutkowski]

Hi,

I've been involved with CloudStack for about six months now. That's still
pretty new compared to many others out there, but the experience of
starting from scratch with CloudStack is still fresh in my head.

Feel free to ask me.

Talk to you later!


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:04 PM, iliyas shirol wrote:

> Greetings Team !
>
> Hope you all are doing good. Btw, this is Iliyas an OpenSource evangelist
> and Cloud lover :) I have been promoting GNU/Linux and FOSS since when I
> was introduced to it. By hobby I write code in BASH and Python. I'm a
> regular CloudStack user and have deployed it for multiple customers.
>
> Btw, I want to contribute to the project by code, documentation and
> promotion. I'm looking for a mentor who can guide me to bootstrap and start
> contributing. We have been evaluating CloudStack 4.1 and have found couple
> of small fixes in the BASH scripts and even in the documentation (which can
> be an initial assignment for me to fix ;) )
>
> Waiting for a postive response from you folks.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> -
> Md. Iliyas Shirol
> Mobile : +91 9902 977 800
> Google : iliyas.shirol@ gmail.com
>



-- 
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud
*™*

Re: Want to contribute

[Mike Tutkowski]

Here is a good place to start:

https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Home


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:11 PM, Mohammad Nour El-Din <
nour.moham...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Iliyas
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 9:04 PM, iliyas shirol  >wrote:
>
> > Greetings Team !
> >
> > Hope you all are doing good. Btw, this is Iliyas an OpenSource evangelist
> > and Cloud lover :) I have been promoting GNU/Linux and FOSS since when I
> > was introduced to it. By hobby I write code in BASH and Python. I'm a
> > regular CloudStack user and have deployed it for multiple customers.
> >
> > Btw, I want to contribute to the project by code, documentation and
> > promotion. I'm looking for a mentor who can guide me to bootstrap and
> start
> > contributing. We have been evaluating CloudStack 4.1 and have found
> couple
> > of small fixes in the BASH scripts and even in the documentation (which
> can
> > be an initial assignment for me to fix ;) )
> >
>
> Cool! why don't you start by explaining the bugs that you found and how did
> you fix them here and when made sure that they are bugs you can go create
> JIRA issues with that and attach the patches. That would be your 1st  step
> to help and eventually become a committer if you keep doing that ;)
>
>
> >
> > Waiting for a postive response from you folks.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > --
> > -
> > Md. Iliyas Shirol
> > Mobile : +91 9902 977 800
> > Google : iliyas.shirol@ gmail.com
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> - Mohammad Nour
> 
> "Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving"
> - Albert Einstein
>



-- 
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud
*™*

RE: Want to contribute

[Sudha Ponnaganti]

Also another area to consider is to fix automation test case failures / 
automating test cases as it is heavy python based framework. 

-Original Message-
From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 12:11 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: Want to contribute

Hi,

I've been involved with CloudStack for about six months now. That's still 
pretty new compared to many others out there, but the experience of starting 
from scratch with CloudStack is still fresh in my head.

Feel free to ask me.

Talk to you later!


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:04 PM, iliyas shirol wrote:

> Greetings Team !
>
> Hope you all are doing good. Btw, this is Iliyas an OpenSource 
> evangelist and Cloud lover :) I have been promoting GNU/Linux and FOSS 
> since when I was introduced to it. By hobby I write code in BASH and 
> Python. I'm a regular CloudStack user and have deployed it for multiple 
> customers.
>
> Btw, I want to contribute to the project by code, documentation and 
> promotion. I'm looking for a mentor who can guide me to bootstrap and 
> start contributing. We have been evaluating CloudStack 4.1 and have 
> found couple of small fixes in the BASH scripts and even in the 
> documentation (which can be an initial assignment for me to fix ;) )
>
> Waiting for a postive response from you folks.
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> -
> Md. Iliyas Shirol
> Mobile : +91 9902 977 800
> Google : iliyas.shirol@ gmail.com
>



--
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the
cloud
*(tm)*

Re: assigning jira tickets

[David Nalley]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:27 PM, Daan Hoogland
 wrote:
> I made a ticket about an internal user issue and want to assign it to me. Can 
> I? I don't seem to have the right in jira. (the number is 2968)  a small 
> patch will be appearing soon.

Your user (dahn) now has appropriate karma - feel free to assign to yourself


--David

assigning jira tickets

[Daan Hoogland]

I made a ticket about an internal user issue and want to assign it to me. Can 
I? I don't seem to have the right in jira. (the number is 2968)  a small patch 
will be appearing soon.

tests for projects

[Daan Hoogland]

LS,

When I look at engine-schema I don't see a test source folder. Is this because 
tests for db objects are not done or because this code should go somewhere 
else, or maybe because there are no tests yet and should go and make some?

Thanks,
Daan Hoogland

VMware - Unable to login to ssvm

[Rayees Namathponnan]

Hi Wido / Hugo

In VMware we are unable to login to ssvm from management server , due to 
permission issue with /cloudstack-common/scripts/vm/systemvm/id_rsa.cloud, 
Currently this file's permission is 644, and not allowing to login; need to 
change this to 600;

Looks like it's a packaging issue, can you please have look on this ? there are 
8 test cases failing from BVT.

Here the defect id https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2534

Regards,
Rayees

Review Request: Fix for NPE during ip range creation

[Venkata Siva Vijayendra Bhamidipati]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/11850/
---

Review request for cloudstack, Chip Childers, Kelven Yang, bharat kumar, and 
Min Chen.


Description
---

Fixing an NPE encountered when creating advanced zone. Exception stack trace 
provided in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2969


This addresses bug CLOUDSTACK-2969.


Diffs
-

  server/src/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManagerImpl.java 111586d 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11850/diff/


Testing
---

Advanced zone creation proceeds correctly with fix in place.


Thanks,

Venkata Siva Vijayendra Bhamidipati

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[John Burwell]

Mike,

Yes, these server-side rails need to be defined and implemented before either 
patch can be merged.  From my perspective, I would like to see the rule 
implemented in the hypervisor as part of the validation of the virtual machine 
definition.  We also need to make sure that this mutual exclusion is 
documented.  Do we usually include this type of documentation with patches of 
this nature?

Thanks,
-John

On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:18 PM, Mike Tutkowski  
wrote:

> Currently they are not yet implemented.
> 
> We have to make sure they are implemented in the GUI from a usability
> standpoint, but the API must check for consistency and throw an exception
> if necessary.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:03 AM, John Burwell  wrote:
> 
>> Mike,
>> 
>> Are the checks only implemented in the UI?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -John
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jun 12, 2013, at 1:02 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi John,
>>> 
>>> Wei and I have discussed making the two features mutually exclusive. We
>>> agree with you that only one should be active at a time. We plan to
>>> implement in the GUI a mechanism (maybe radio buttons) to turn his
>> feature
>>> on and mine off and vice versa.
>>> 
>>> I was thinking if I wait until he checks in his code, then I update and
>>> merge that I will be the person resolving merge conflicts in the
>> JavaScript
>>> code (there shouldn't be a problem in the Java code) as opposed to
>> putting
>>> that work on someone else.
>>> 
>>> Let me know what you think.
>>> 
>>> Oh, was going to ask you what "FS" stands for here.
>>> 
>>> Thanks!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:56 AM, John Burwell 
>> wrote:
>>> 
 Mike,
 
 How have Wei and you resolved the issue of conflicting QoS mechanisms
 between the Hypervisor and Storage layers?  Have the affected FSs been
 updated with that decision?
 
 In terms of merge timing, can you describe the dependencies between the
 patches?
 
 Thanks,
 -John
 
 
 
 
 On Jun 12, 2013, at 12:43 PM, Mike Tutkowski
  wrote:
 
> No problem, John.
> 
> I still want to re-review it by myself before coming up with a new
>> patch
> file.
> 
> Also, maybe I should first wait for Wei's changes to be checked in and
> merge those into mine before generating a new patch file?
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:40 AM, John Burwell 
 wrote:
> 
>> Mike,
>> 
>> I just realized that I forgot to publish my review.  I am offline ATM,
>> but I will publish it in the next couple of hours.
>> 
>> Do you plan to update your the patch in Review Board?
>> 
>> Sorry for the oversight,
>> -John
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:26 AM, Mike Tutkowski
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Edison, John, and Wei (and whoever else is reading this :) ),
>>> 
>>> Just an FYI that I believe I have implemented all the areas we wanted
>>> addressed.
>>> 
>>> I plan to review the code again tomorrow morning or afternoon, then
 send
>> in
>>> another patch.
>>> 
>>> Thanks for all the work on this everyone!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>>> 
 Sure, that sounds good.
 
 
 On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Wei ZHOU 
>> wrote:
 
> Hi Mike,
> 
> It looks the two feature do not have many conflicts in Java code,
>> except
> the cloudstack UI.
> If you do not mind, I will merge disk_io_throttling branch into
 master
> this
> week, so that you can develop based on it.
> 
> -Wei
> 
> 
> 2013/6/11 Mike Tutkowski 
> 
>> Hey John,
>> 
>> The SolidFire patch does not depend on the object_store branch,
>> but
 -
>> as
>> Edison mentioned - it might be easier if we merge the SolidFire
 branch
> into
>> the object_store branch before object_store goes into master.
>> 
>> I'm not sure how the disk_io_throttling fits into this merge
 strategy.
>> Perhaps Wei can chime in on that.
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 11:07 AM, John Burwell <
>> jburw...@basho.com>
> wrote:
>> 
>>> Mike,
>>> 
>>> We have a delicate merge dance to perform.  The
>> disk_io_throttling,
>>> solidfire, and object_store appear to have a number of
>> overlapping
>>> elements.  I understand the dependencies between the patches to
>> be
 as
>>> follows:
>>> 
>>> object_store <- solidfire -> disk_io_throttling
>>> 
>>> Am I correct that the device management aspects of SolidFire are
> additive
>>> to the object_store branch or there are circular depende

Re: [ACS42] Ceph Storage Integration with Cloudstack -

[John Burwell]

Wido,

These expunge operations should like general maintenance processes that should 
be implemented in the storage engine.  It feels like we could implement the 
algorithm to identify unused templates and delegate to storage driver to remove 
them.  It also feels like we d something similar for volumes.  What do you 
think?

Thanks,
-John

On Jun 12, 2013, at 1:22 AM, Wido den Hollander  wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I recently wrote a short blog post about this: 
> http://blog.widodh.nl/2013/06/a-quick-note-on-running-cloudstack-with-rbd-on-ubuntu-12-04/
> 
> The RBD integration in CloudStack 4.2 (master branch) is ready for testing, 
> not everything has been verified by me, but it should work.
> 
> Things that I'm not yet sure about:
> * Expunging of RBD volumes
> * Expunging of unused templates from Primary Storage
> 
> It has all been integrated into the build process in master, so it should be 
> just a matter of setting up a cluster from the master branch, add Ceph 
> primary storage and see if it works.
> 
> A second pair of eyes on the code is always welcome, since I probably forgot 
> something.
> 
> Wido
> 
> On 06/12/2013 03:36 AM, Sudha Ponnaganti wrote:
>> Hi Wido,
>> 
>> This is regarding Ceph integration validation related to the following 
>> tickets
>> 
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-574
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-1191
>> 
>> If someone want to validate Ceph integration with Cloudstack, what are the 
>> requirements and also is code ready for someone to validate??
>> 
>> Thanks
>> /sudha
>> 
>> 

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[Mike Tutkowski]

Hi John,

So, here's what I was planning to do. Of course feel free to correct me on
this approach.

I think it's OK if Wei merges his code into master and then I can draw from
the main repo and merge master into mine locally.

1) Once I get Wei's code and merge, I plan to add a little GUI code to make
it user friendly (toggle between these features on the Add Disk Offering
window).

2) I plan to write validation logic for the create-disk-offering API
command which throws an exception if the rules are not followed (this
should never be triggered from the GUI since the GUI will have controls in
place to toggle between the one feature and the other).

I'm not sure about documentation. I haven't had much experience with it on
CloudStack projects yet.

Thanks!


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:21 PM, John Burwell  wrote:

> Mike,
>
> Yes, these server-side rails need to be defined and implemented before
> either patch can be merged.  From my perspective, I would like to see the
> rule implemented in the hypervisor as part of the validation of the virtual
> machine definition.  We also need to make sure that this mutual exclusion
> is documented.  Do we usually include this type of documentation with
> patches of this nature?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:18 PM, Mike Tutkowski 
> wrote:
>
> > Currently they are not yet implemented.
> >
> > We have to make sure they are implemented in the GUI from a usability
> > standpoint, but the API must check for consistency and throw an exception
> > if necessary.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:03 AM, John Burwell 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Mike,
> >>
> >> Are the checks only implemented in the UI?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> -John
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jun 12, 2013, at 1:02 PM, Mike Tutkowski
> >>  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi John,
> >>>
> >>> Wei and I have discussed making the two features mutually exclusive. We
> >>> agree with you that only one should be active at a time. We plan to
> >>> implement in the GUI a mechanism (maybe radio buttons) to turn his
> >> feature
> >>> on and mine off and vice versa.
> >>>
> >>> I was thinking if I wait until he checks in his code, then I update and
> >>> merge that I will be the person resolving merge conflicts in the
> >> JavaScript
> >>> code (there shouldn't be a problem in the Java code) as opposed to
> >> putting
> >>> that work on someone else.
> >>>
> >>> Let me know what you think.
> >>>
> >>> Oh, was going to ask you what "FS" stands for here.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:56 AM, John Burwell 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
>  Mike,
> 
>  How have Wei and you resolved the issue of conflicting QoS mechanisms
>  between the Hypervisor and Storage layers?  Have the affected FSs been
>  updated with that decision?
> 
>  In terms of merge timing, can you describe the dependencies between
> the
>  patches?
> 
>  Thanks,
>  -John
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  On Jun 12, 2013, at 12:43 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>   wrote:
> 
> > No problem, John.
> >
> > I still want to re-review it by myself before coming up with a new
> >> patch
> > file.
> >
> > Also, maybe I should first wait for Wei's changes to be checked in
> and
> > merge those into mine before generating a new patch file?
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:40 AM, John Burwell 
>  wrote:
> >
> >> Mike,
> >>
> >> I just realized that I forgot to publish my review.  I am offline
> ATM,
> >> but I will publish it in the next couple of hours.
> >>
> >> Do you plan to update your the patch in Review Board?
> >>
> >> Sorry for the oversight,
> >> -John
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:26 AM, Mike Tutkowski
> >>  wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Edison, John, and Wei (and whoever else is reading this :) ),
> >>>
> >>> Just an FYI that I believe I have implemented all the areas we
> wanted
> >>> addressed.
> >>>
> >>> I plan to review the code again tomorrow morning or afternoon, then
>  send
> >> in
> >>> another patch.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks for all the work on this everyone!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> >>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >>>
>  Sure, that sounds good.
> 
> 
>  On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:11 PM, Wei ZHOU  >
> >> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Mike,
> >
> > It looks the two feature do not have many conflicts in Java code,
> >> except
> > the cloudstack UI.
> > If you do not mind, I will merge disk_io_throttling branch into
>  master
> > this
> > week, so that you can develop based on it.
> >
> > -Wei
> >
> >
> > 2013/6/11 Mike Tutkowski 
> >
> >> Hey John,
> >>
> >> The SolidFire patch does not depend

RE: Please run with assert on when you're developing...

[Alex Huang]

Some (ok one) have asked me what is MAVEN_DEBUG_OPTS.  That's my bad for not 
being clear.

Adding "-ea" to MAVEN_OPTS will cause assert to be on for maven and maven's 
plugins as well.  That means during clean, install stages, you might hit some 
weird asserts (according to others experience on the web).

So what I did is added it to the script mvnDebug which utilizes 
MAVEN_DEBUG_OPTS.  When I run jetty:run, I always use mvnDebug which sets up 
the debug port for the jvm and with this change also run in assert mode.  You 
always want to use mvnDebug for your own testing of the server anyways because 
you can easily attach for debugging purposes.

The drawback to doing it this way is that the unit tests that are ran during 
the install stage do not hit asserts.  (I think but haven't confirmed yet.)

--Alex

> -Original Message-
> From: Alex Huang [mailto:alex.hu...@citrix.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 5:18 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Please run with assert on when you're developing...
> 
> Hi All,
> 
> CloudStack code have many asserts to guarantee code is written correctly for
> the developers.  I recently realized that since we've converted to maven, we
> no longer run with assert on as developers.  It is very important that we do
> because it will find problems for you during load time and run time.
> 
> To run with assert on, you can add "-ea" to MAVEN_DEBUG_OPTS.
> 
> I tried this recently and there are many places that are asserting.  Please 
> do a
> run and fix what you can.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> --Alex

Re: [NOTICE] CloudStack 4.1.1 release

[Chip Childers]

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 05:18:37PM +, Kelven Yang wrote:
> I just fixed a critical bug that could cause XenServer host to be out of
> service. I would like the fix to be merged into 4.1.1 release
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2925
> 
> 
> Kelven

In cherry-picking this into the 4.1 branch, the following conflict
results:

error: could not apply f38c4e9... Bug CS-17825: Don't rely on XS to cleanup 
idle session but proactively close it from console proxy
hint: after resolving the conflicts, mark the corrected paths
hint: with 'git add ' or 'git rm '
hint: and commit the result with 'git commit'


Here's git status:
# On branch 4.1
# Changes to be committed:
#
#modified: 
console-proxy/src/com/cloud/consolesoleproxy/ConsoleProxyGCThread.java
#modified: 
console-proxy/src/com/cloud/consoleproxy/consoleproxyConsoleProxyVncClient.java
#modified: 
console-proxy/src/com/cloud/comnsoleproxy/vnc/VncClientPacketSender.java
#modified: 
console-proxy/srcrc/com/cloud/consoleproxy/vnc/VncServerPacketReceiver.java
#
# Unmerged paths:
#   (use "git add/rm ..." as appropriate to mark resolution)
#
#deleted by us: 
services/console-proxy/server/src/com/cloud/consoleproxy/ConsoleProxyClientBase.java
#

Should I simply delete ConsoleProxyClientBase.java in 4.1?

Re: Test halting build every now and then

[Sheng Yang]

I tried to look into this, but it's really hard for me to reproduce it(I've
run the case for 50 times and no show of the issue).

The bash command I used is: for i in {1..50}; do mvn -Dtest=NioTest test
-pl utils; done

>From the log, it looks like server is up but client didn't connect to the
server. The correct log of whole process should be:

2013-06-12 13:30:50,079 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Test
2013-06-12 13:30:50,103 INFO  [utils.nio.NioServer]
(NioTestServer-Selector:) NioConnection started and listening on
0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:
2013-06-12 13:30:50,109 INFO  [utils.nio.NioClient]
(NioTestServer-Selector:) Connecting to 127.0.0.1:
2013-06-12 13:30:50,351 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
(NioTestServer-Handler-1:) Server: Received CONNECT task
2013-06-12 13:30:50,388 INFO  [utils.nio.NioClient]
(NioTestServer-Selector:) SSL: Handshake done
2013-06-12 13:30:50,389 INFO  [utils.nio.NioClient]
(NioTestServer-Selector:) Connected to 127.0.0.1:
2013-06-12 13:30:50,389 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
(NioTestServer-Handler-1:) Client: Received CONNECT task
2013-06-12 13:30:51,406 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Client: Data
sent
2013-06-12 13:30:51,406 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Client: Data
sent
2013-06-12 13:30:51,556 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
(NioTestServer-Handler-2:) Server: Received DATA task
2013-06-12 13:30:51,597 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
(NioTestServer-Handler-3:) Server: Received DATA task
2013-06-12 13:30:51,834 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
(NioTestServer-Handler-2:) Verify done.
2013-06-12 13:30:51,856 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
(NioTestServer-Handler-3:) Verify done.
2013-06-12 13:30:52,406 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Client
stopped.
2013-06-12 13:30:52,407 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Server
stopped.

I've tried wireless network, still unable to reproduce.

Is there anything else may affect the reproducibility? I thought it was a
racy issue, but cannot prove it, since client is not up at all in your case.

--Sheng



On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:

> Hi Daan,
>
> Yeah, now that you remind me, I believe we did talk about a wireless setup
> possibly being behind this a while ago. :)
>
> When I'm working from home, I am on a wireless network.
>
> In the office, my primary connection is via cable, but I do have another
> connection to the Internet via wireless.
>
> It's not the end of the world when this problem occurs. I just CTRL-C and
> try again, but I thought if someone had a solution that perhaps I didn't
> see that I could implement it on my side.
>
> Thanks for your time!!
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Daan Hoogland <
> dhoogl...@schubergphilis.com
> > wrote:
>
> > H Mike,
> >
> > I had this too, working from my home machine and got some hint on this
> > list, stating a wireless interface on your machine might be the problem.
> I
> > haven't been able to pinpoint the culprit yet. What is your setup?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Daan Hoogland
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
> > Sent: woensdag 12 juni 2013 1:19
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Test halting build every now and then
> >
> > Took five tries to get the build over this hump a moment ago.
> >
> > Any thoughts on what's going on there?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Does anyone know if there is a way to stop the build from (very often)
> > > halting here indefinitely?
> > >
> > > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,836 INFO  [utils.net.NetUtilsTest] (main:) IP is
> > > 1234:5678::dd3b:e82c:ce6b:fe5c
> > > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,839 INFO  [utils.net.NetUtilsTest] (main:) IP is
> > > 1234:5678::814a:9955:e8e2:84f Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0,
> > > Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.085 sec Running
> > > com.cloud.utils.StringUtilsTest Tests run: 10, Failures: 0, Errors: 0,
> > > Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.011 sec Running
> > > com.cloud.utils.testcase.NioTest
> > > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,860 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Test
> > > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,913 INFO  [utils.nio.NioServer]
> > > (NioTestServer-Selector:) NioConnection started and listening on
> > > 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:
> > >
> > > I usually just wait for this point in the build and if it halts, then
> > > I CTRL-C and try again.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Mike Tutkowski*
> > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> > > o: 303.746.7302
> > > Advancing the way the world uses the
> > > cloud
> > > *(tm)*
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Mike Tutkowski*
> > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> > o: 303.746.7302
> > Advancing the way the world uses the
> > cloud

RE: tests for projects

[Alex Huang]

Dan,

It's tough to write unit tests for engine-schema because the requirement is for 
all unit tests to work without a DB so testing DB access without a DB is kinda 
useless.

The tests themselves probably won't be very interesting anyways.  All of the 
classes are actually based off one class, GenericDaoBase, which does most of 
the SQL generation.  

There may have been some tests and I may have left them in the server directory 
when I pulled together the engine-schema directory a couple of months ago. 


--Alex

> -Original Message-
> From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:dhoogl...@schubergphilis.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 12:52 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: tests for projects
> 
> LS,
> 
> When I look at engine-schema I don't see a test source folder. Is this because
> tests for db objects are not done or because this code should go somewhere
> else, or maybe because there are no tests yet and should go and make some?
> 
> Thanks,
> Daan Hoogland

RE: Test halting build every now and then

[Daan Hoogland]

Macosx?
Eclipse?

I will try on windows sometime soon (with wireless).

-Original Message-
From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sh...@yasker.org] 
Sent: woensdag 12 juni 2013 22:37
To: 
Subject: Re: Test halting build every now and then

I tried to look into this, but it's really hard for me to reproduce it(I've
run the case for 50 times and no show of the issue).

The bash command I used is: for i in {1..50}; do mvn -Dtest=NioTest test
-pl utils; done

>From the log, it looks like server is up but client didn't connect to the
server. The correct log of whole process should be:

2013-06-12 13:30:50,079 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Test
2013-06-12 13:30:50,103 INFO  [utils.nio.NioServer]
(NioTestServer-Selector:) NioConnection started and listening on
0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:
2013-06-12 13:30:50,109 INFO  [utils.nio.NioClient]
(NioTestServer-Selector:) Connecting to 127.0.0.1:
2013-06-12 13:30:50,351 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
(NioTestServer-Handler-1:) Server: Received CONNECT task
2013-06-12 13:30:50,388 INFO  [utils.nio.NioClient]
(NioTestServer-Selector:) SSL: Handshake done
2013-06-12 13:30:50,389 INFO  [utils.nio.NioClient]
(NioTestServer-Selector:) Connected to 127.0.0.1:
2013-06-12 13:30:50,389 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
(NioTestServer-Handler-1:) Client: Received CONNECT task
2013-06-12 13:30:51,406 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Client: Data
sent
2013-06-12 13:30:51,406 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Client: Data
sent
2013-06-12 13:30:51,556 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
(NioTestServer-Handler-2:) Server: Received DATA task
2013-06-12 13:30:51,597 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
(NioTestServer-Handler-3:) Server: Received DATA task
2013-06-12 13:30:51,834 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
(NioTestServer-Handler-2:) Verify done.
2013-06-12 13:30:51,856 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
(NioTestServer-Handler-3:) Verify done.
2013-06-12 13:30:52,406 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Client
stopped.
2013-06-12 13:30:52,407 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Server
stopped.

I've tried wireless network, still unable to reproduce.

Is there anything else may affect the reproducibility? I thought it was a
racy issue, but cannot prove it, since client is not up at all in your case.

--Sheng



On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:

> Hi Daan,
>
> Yeah, now that you remind me, I believe we did talk about a wireless setup
> possibly being behind this a while ago. :)
>
> When I'm working from home, I am on a wireless network.
>
> In the office, my primary connection is via cable, but I do have another
> connection to the Internet via wireless.
>
> It's not the end of the world when this problem occurs. I just CTRL-C and
> try again, but I thought if someone had a solution that perhaps I didn't
> see that I could implement it on my side.
>
> Thanks for your time!!
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Daan Hoogland <
> dhoogl...@schubergphilis.com
> > wrote:
>
> > H Mike,
> >
> > I had this too, working from my home machine and got some hint on this
> > list, stating a wireless interface on your machine might be the problem.
> I
> > haven't been able to pinpoint the culprit yet. What is your setup?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Daan Hoogland
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
> > Sent: woensdag 12 juni 2013 1:19
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Test halting build every now and then
> >
> > Took five tries to get the build over this hump a moment ago.
> >
> > Any thoughts on what's going on there?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Does anyone know if there is a way to stop the build from (very often)
> > > halting here indefinitely?
> > >
> > > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,836 INFO  [utils.net.NetUtilsTest] (main:) IP is
> > > 1234:5678::dd3b:e82c:ce6b:fe5c
> > > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,839 INFO  [utils.net.NetUtilsTest] (main:) IP is
> > > 1234:5678::814a:9955:e8e2:84f Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0,
> > > Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.085 sec Running
> > > com.cloud.utils.StringUtilsTest Tests run: 10, Failures: 0, Errors: 0,
> > > Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.011 sec Running
> > > com.cloud.utils.testcase.NioTest
> > > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,860 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Test
> > > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,913 INFO  [utils.nio.NioServer]
> > > (NioTestServer-Selector:) NioConnection started and listening on
> > > 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:
> > >
> > > I usually just wait for this point in the build and if it halts, then
> > > I CTRL-C and try again.
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Mike Tutkowski*
> > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> > > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> > > o: 303.746.7302
> > > Advancing the way the world uses the
> > > cloud
> > > *(tm)*
> > >
> >
> >
> >

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[John Burwell]

Mike,

Looking through the code, I am trying to understand how CreateDiskOfferingCmd 
would have the context to identify the conflict.  Naively, it seems to me that 
this rule would need to be enforced when a virtual machine is being deployed.  
Looking through the code, it seems like we should add a private 
validateStorageQoS method to com.cloud.vm.UserVmManagerImpl to check this 
condition and throws a ResourceAllocationException when the QoS definitions are 
inconsistent.   We would then add calls to it from each of the VM creation 
methods in the service.  Do this type of approach sound reasonable?

Thanks,
-John

On Jun 12, 2013, at 4:30 PM, Mike Tutkowski  
wrote:

> Hi John,
> 
> So, here's what I was planning to do. Of course feel free to correct me on
> this approach.
> 
> I think it's OK if Wei merges his code into master and then I can draw from
> the main repo and merge master into mine locally.
> 
> 1) Once I get Wei's code and merge, I plan to add a little GUI code to make
> it user friendly (toggle between these features on the Add Disk Offering
> window).
> 
> 2) I plan to write validation logic for the create-disk-offering API
> command which throws an exception if the rules are not followed (this
> should never be triggered from the GUI since the GUI will have controls in
> place to toggle between the one feature and the other).
> 
> I'm not sure about documentation. I haven't had much experience with it on
> CloudStack projects yet.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:21 PM, John Burwell  wrote:
> 
>> Mike,
>> 
>> Yes, these server-side rails need to be defined and implemented before
>> either patch can be merged.  From my perspective, I would like to see the
>> rule implemented in the hypervisor as part of the validation of the virtual
>> machine definition.  We also need to make sure that this mutual exclusion
>> is documented.  Do we usually include this type of documentation with
>> patches of this nature?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -John
>> 
>> On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:18 PM, Mike Tutkowski 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Currently they are not yet implemented.
>>> 
>>> We have to make sure they are implemented in the GUI from a usability
>>> standpoint, but the API must check for consistency and throw an exception
>>> if necessary.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:03 AM, John Burwell 
>> wrote:
>>> 
 Mike,
 
 Are the checks only implemented in the UI?
 
 Thanks,
 -John
 
 
 
 
 On Jun 12, 2013, at 1:02 PM, Mike Tutkowski
  wrote:
 
> Hi John,
> 
> Wei and I have discussed making the two features mutually exclusive. We
> agree with you that only one should be active at a time. We plan to
> implement in the GUI a mechanism (maybe radio buttons) to turn his
 feature
> on and mine off and vice versa.
> 
> I was thinking if I wait until he checks in his code, then I update and
> merge that I will be the person resolving merge conflicts in the
 JavaScript
> code (there shouldn't be a problem in the Java code) as opposed to
 putting
> that work on someone else.
> 
> Let me know what you think.
> 
> Oh, was going to ask you what "FS" stands for here.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:56 AM, John Burwell 
 wrote:
> 
>> Mike,
>> 
>> How have Wei and you resolved the issue of conflicting QoS mechanisms
>> between the Hypervisor and Storage layers?  Have the affected FSs been
>> updated with that decision?
>> 
>> In terms of merge timing, can you describe the dependencies between
>> the
>> patches?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -John
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jun 12, 2013, at 12:43 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> No problem, John.
>>> 
>>> I still want to re-review it by myself before coming up with a new
 patch
>>> file.
>>> 
>>> Also, maybe I should first wait for Wei's changes to be checked in
>> and
>>> merge those into mine before generating a new patch file?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:40 AM, John Burwell 
>> wrote:
>>> 
 Mike,
 
 I just realized that I forgot to publish my review.  I am offline
>> ATM,
 but I will publish it in the next couple of hours.
 
 Do you plan to update your the patch in Review Board?
 
 Sorry for the oversight,
 -John
 
 
 
 
 On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:26 AM, Mike Tutkowski
  wrote:
 
> Hi Edison, John, and Wei (and whoever else is reading this :) ),
> 
> Just an FYI that I believe I have implemented all the areas we
>> wanted
> addressed.
> 
> I plan to review the code again tomorrow morning or afternoon, then
>> send
 in
> another patch.
> 
> Thanks for all the work on thi

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[Mike Tutkowski]

Hi John,

So, maybe I'm wrong about this, but what I was thinking is that we'd build
two radio buttons into the Add Disk Offering dialog (we can ignore Compute
Offerings for 4.2 since my feature doesn't yet support them).

Let's just called these radio buttons 1) Hypervisor QoS and 2) Storage QoS
for the purpose of this e-mail.

By default, neither radio button is selected and no QoS fields are visible.

If the user selects the Storage QoS radio button, then the Custom IOPS
checkbox and the Min and Max text fields are made visible.

If the user changes his mind and selects the Hypervisor QoS radio button,
then the Custom IOPS checkbox and the Min and Max text fields disappear and
are replaced by the two Hypervisor QoS text fields.

This way, the user can choose neither QoS option or one of them or the
other, but never both.

On the API side, I was thinking of having logic in place when a request
comes in to create a Disk Offering to confirm these fields are the way we
want them.

Once we know the Disk Offering is in order, a user can create a data disk
from it. Since we checked the validity of the Disk Offering when it was
created, the VM should never be asked to use Hypervisor QoS when Storage
QoS in being utilized.

Does that make sense or did I miss something?

Thanks


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:54 PM, John Burwell  wrote:

> Mike,
>
> Looking through the code, I am trying to understand how
> CreateDiskOfferingCmd would have the context to identify the conflict.
>  Naively, it seems to me that this rule would need to be enforced when a
> virtual machine is being deployed.  Looking through the code, it seems like
> we should add a private validateStorageQoS method to
> com.cloud.vm.UserVmManagerImpl to check this condition and throws a
> ResourceAllocationException when the QoS definitions are inconsistent.   We
> would then add calls to it from each of the VM creation methods in the
> service.  Do this type of approach sound reasonable?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 4:30 PM, Mike Tutkowski 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi John,
> >
> > So, here's what I was planning to do. Of course feel free to correct me
> on
> > this approach.
> >
> > I think it's OK if Wei merges his code into master and then I can draw
> from
> > the main repo and merge master into mine locally.
> >
> > 1) Once I get Wei's code and merge, I plan to add a little GUI code to
> make
> > it user friendly (toggle between these features on the Add Disk Offering
> > window).
> >
> > 2) I plan to write validation logic for the create-disk-offering API
> > command which throws an exception if the rules are not followed (this
> > should never be triggered from the GUI since the GUI will have controls
> in
> > place to toggle between the one feature and the other).
> >
> > I'm not sure about documentation. I haven't had much experience with it
> on
> > CloudStack projects yet.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:21 PM, John Burwell 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Mike,
> >>
> >> Yes, these server-side rails need to be defined and implemented before
> >> either patch can be merged.  From my perspective, I would like to see
> the
> >> rule implemented in the hypervisor as part of the validation of the
> virtual
> >> machine definition.  We also need to make sure that this mutual
> exclusion
> >> is documented.  Do we usually include this type of documentation with
> >> patches of this nature?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> -John
> >>
> >> On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:18 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Currently they are not yet implemented.
> >>>
> >>> We have to make sure they are implemented in the GUI from a usability
> >>> standpoint, but the API must check for consistency and throw an
> exception
> >>> if necessary.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:03 AM, John Burwell 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
>  Mike,
> 
>  Are the checks only implemented in the UI?
> 
>  Thanks,
>  -John
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  On Jun 12, 2013, at 1:02 PM, Mike Tutkowski
>   wrote:
> 
> > Hi John,
> >
> > Wei and I have discussed making the two features mutually exclusive.
> We
> > agree with you that only one should be active at a time. We plan to
> > implement in the GUI a mechanism (maybe radio buttons) to turn his
>  feature
> > on and mine off and vice versa.
> >
> > I was thinking if I wait until he checks in his code, then I update
> and
> > merge that I will be the person resolving merge conflicts in the
>  JavaScript
> > code (there shouldn't be a problem in the Java code) as opposed to
>  putting
> > that work on someone else.
> >
> > Let me know what you think.
> >
> > Oh, was going to ask you what "FS" stands for here.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:56 AM, John Burwell 
>  wrote:
> >
> >> Mike,
> >>
> >> How have Wei and you resolved the issue o

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[John Burwell]

Mike,

As I understand these two patches, the throttled I?O settings are applied from 
the hypervisor side, and possibly defined in a compute offering where 
provisioned IOPS are defined on the storage side through disk offerings.  I 
don't see how the management server could enforce this mutual exclusion between 
provisioned IOPS and throttled I/O until a compute and disk offering were 
selected.  These selections come together when we deploy a VM.  Based on these 
assumptions, I would expect to see enforcement of this rule in UI at the time 
of VM creation/definition and on the server side, as part of the VM creation.  
It feels like any attempt to enforce this rule when defining offering would be 
premature, and unnecessarily limit flexibility.  Are my assumptions and 
understanding correct?

Thanks,
-John

On Jun 12, 2013, at 5:04 PM, Mike Tutkowski  
wrote:

> Hi John,
> 
> So, maybe I'm wrong about this, but what I was thinking is that we'd build
> two radio buttons into the Add Disk Offering dialog (we can ignore Compute
> Offerings for 4.2 since my feature doesn't yet support them).
> 
> Let's just called these radio buttons 1) Hypervisor QoS and 2) Storage QoS
> for the purpose of this e-mail.
> 
> By default, neither radio button is selected and no QoS fields are visible.
> 
> If the user selects the Storage QoS radio button, then the Custom IOPS
> checkbox and the Min and Max text fields are made visible.
> 
> If the user changes his mind and selects the Hypervisor QoS radio button,
> then the Custom IOPS checkbox and the Min and Max text fields disappear and
> are replaced by the two Hypervisor QoS text fields.
> 
> This way, the user can choose neither QoS option or one of them or the
> other, but never both.
> 
> On the API side, I was thinking of having logic in place when a request
> comes in to create a Disk Offering to confirm these fields are the way we
> want them.
> 
> Once we know the Disk Offering is in order, a user can create a data disk
> from it. Since we checked the validity of the Disk Offering when it was
> created, the VM should never be asked to use Hypervisor QoS when Storage
> QoS in being utilized.
> 
> Does that make sense or did I miss something?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:54 PM, John Burwell  wrote:
> 
>> Mike,
>> 
>> Looking through the code, I am trying to understand how
>> CreateDiskOfferingCmd would have the context to identify the conflict.
>> Naively, it seems to me that this rule would need to be enforced when a
>> virtual machine is being deployed.  Looking through the code, it seems like
>> we should add a private validateStorageQoS method to
>> com.cloud.vm.UserVmManagerImpl to check this condition and throws a
>> ResourceAllocationException when the QoS definitions are inconsistent.   We
>> would then add calls to it from each of the VM creation methods in the
>> service.  Do this type of approach sound reasonable?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -John
>> 
>> On Jun 12, 2013, at 4:30 PM, Mike Tutkowski 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi John,
>>> 
>>> So, here's what I was planning to do. Of course feel free to correct me
>> on
>>> this approach.
>>> 
>>> I think it's OK if Wei merges his code into master and then I can draw
>> from
>>> the main repo and merge master into mine locally.
>>> 
>>> 1) Once I get Wei's code and merge, I plan to add a little GUI code to
>> make
>>> it user friendly (toggle between these features on the Add Disk Offering
>>> window).
>>> 
>>> 2) I plan to write validation logic for the create-disk-offering API
>>> command which throws an exception if the rules are not followed (this
>>> should never be triggered from the GUI since the GUI will have controls
>> in
>>> place to toggle between the one feature and the other).
>>> 
>>> I'm not sure about documentation. I haven't had much experience with it
>> on
>>> CloudStack projects yet.
>>> 
>>> Thanks!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:21 PM, John Burwell 
>> wrote:
>>> 
 Mike,
 
 Yes, these server-side rails need to be defined and implemented before
 either patch can be merged.  From my perspective, I would like to see
>> the
 rule implemented in the hypervisor as part of the validation of the
>> virtual
 machine definition.  We also need to make sure that this mutual
>> exclusion
 is documented.  Do we usually include this type of documentation with
 patches of this nature?
 
 Thanks,
 -John
 
 On Jun 12, 2013, at 2:18 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
 wrote:
 
> Currently they are not yet implemented.
> 
> We have to make sure they are implemented in the GUI from a usability
> standpoint, but the API must check for consistency and throw an
>> exception
> if necessary.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 11:03 AM, John Burwell 
 wrote:
> 
>> Mike,
>> 
>> Are the checks only implemented in the UI?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -John
>> 
>> 
>> 

Re: Test halting build every now and then

[Sheng Yang]

Eclipse didn't complain for me.

BTW: I am using Linux as development environment.

--Sheng


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Daan Hoogland  wrote:

> Macosx?
> Eclipse?
>
> I will try on windows sometime soon (with wireless).
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sh...@yasker.org]
> Sent: woensdag 12 juni 2013 22:37
> To: 
> Subject: Re: Test halting build every now and then
>
> I tried to look into this, but it's really hard for me to reproduce it(I've
> run the case for 50 times and no show of the issue).
>
> The bash command I used is: for i in {1..50}; do mvn -Dtest=NioTest test
> -pl utils; done
>
> From the log, it looks like server is up but client didn't connect to the
> server. The correct log of whole process should be:
>
> 2013-06-12 13:30:50,079 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Test
> 2013-06-12 13:30:50,103 INFO  [utils.nio.NioServer]
> (NioTestServer-Selector:) NioConnection started and listening on
> 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:
> 2013-06-12 13:30:50,109 INFO  [utils.nio.NioClient]
> (NioTestServer-Selector:) Connecting to 127.0.0.1:
> 2013-06-12 13:30:50,351 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
> (NioTestServer-Handler-1:) Server: Received CONNECT task
> 2013-06-12 13:30:50,388 INFO  [utils.nio.NioClient]
> (NioTestServer-Selector:) SSL: Handshake done
> 2013-06-12 13:30:50,389 INFO  [utils.nio.NioClient]
> (NioTestServer-Selector:) Connected to 127.0.0.1:
> 2013-06-12 13:30:50,389 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
> (NioTestServer-Handler-1:) Client: Received CONNECT task
> 2013-06-12 13:30:51,406 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Client: Data
> sent
> 2013-06-12 13:30:51,406 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Client: Data
> sent
> 2013-06-12 13:30:51,556 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
> (NioTestServer-Handler-2:) Server: Received DATA task
> 2013-06-12 13:30:51,597 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
> (NioTestServer-Handler-3:) Server: Received DATA task
> 2013-06-12 13:30:51,834 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
> (NioTestServer-Handler-2:) Verify done.
> 2013-06-12 13:30:51,856 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
> (NioTestServer-Handler-3:) Verify done.
> 2013-06-12 13:30:52,406 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Client
> stopped.
> 2013-06-12 13:30:52,407 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Server
> stopped.
>
> I've tried wireless network, still unable to reproduce.
>
> Is there anything else may affect the reproducibility? I thought it was a
> racy issue, but cannot prove it, since client is not up at all in your
> case.
>
> --Sheng
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi Daan,
> >
> > Yeah, now that you remind me, I believe we did talk about a wireless
> setup
> > possibly being behind this a while ago. :)
> >
> > When I'm working from home, I am on a wireless network.
> >
> > In the office, my primary connection is via cable, but I do have another
> > connection to the Internet via wireless.
> >
> > It's not the end of the world when this problem occurs. I just CTRL-C and
> > try again, but I thought if someone had a solution that perhaps I didn't
> > see that I could implement it on my side.
> >
> > Thanks for your time!!
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Daan Hoogland <
> > dhoogl...@schubergphilis.com
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > H Mike,
> > >
> > > I had this too, working from my home machine and got some hint on this
> > > list, stating a wireless interface on your machine might be the
> problem.
> > I
> > > haven't been able to pinpoint the culprit yet. What is your setup?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Daan Hoogland
> > >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
> > > Sent: woensdag 12 juni 2013 1:19
> > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: Test halting build every now and then
> > >
> > > Took five tries to get the build over this hump a moment ago.
> > >
> > > Any thoughts on what's going on there?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> > > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > Does anyone know if there is a way to stop the build from (very
> often)
> > > > halting here indefinitely?
> > > >
> > > > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,836 INFO  [utils.net.NetUtilsTest] (main:) IP is
> > > > 1234:5678::dd3b:e82c:ce6b:fe5c
> > > > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,839 INFO  [utils.net.NetUtilsTest] (main:) IP is
> > > > 1234:5678::814a:9955:e8e2:84f Tests run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0,
> > > > Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.085 sec Running
> > > > com.cloud.utils.StringUtilsTest Tests run: 10, Failures: 0, Errors:
> 0,
> > > > Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 0.011 sec Running
> > > > com.cloud.utils.testcase.NioTest
> > > > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,860 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Test
> > > > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,913 INFO  [utils.nio.NioServer]
> > > > (NioTestServer-Selector:) NioConnection started and listening on
> > > > 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:
> > > >
> > > > I usu

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[Mike Tutkowski]

Hey John,

Perhaps I don't fully understand how Wei's feature works.

I guess I thought if you choose Hypervisor QoS, you do so on Compute
Offerings (root disks) and/or Disk Offerings (data disks).

>From my thinking, you're root disk could be under Hypervisor QoS, but your
data disk could be under Storage QoS.

Is that incorrect?

Thanks


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:10 PM, John Burwell  wrote:

> Mike,
>
> As I understand these two patches, the throttled I?O settings are applied
> from the hypervisor side, and possibly defined in a compute offering where
> provisioned IOPS are defined on the storage side through disk offerings.  I
> don't see how the management server could enforce this mutual exclusion
> between provisioned IOPS and throttled I/O until a compute and disk
> offering were selected.  These selections come together when we deploy a
> VM.  Based on these assumptions, I would expect to see enforcement of this
> rule in UI at the time of VM creation/definition and on the server side, as
> part of the VM creation.  It feels like any attempt to enforce this rule
> when defining offering would be premature, and unnecessarily limit
> flexibility.  Are my assumptions and understanding correct?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 5:04 PM, Mike Tutkowski 
> wrote:
>
> > Hi John,
> >
> > So, maybe I'm wrong about this, but what I was thinking is that we'd
> build
> > two radio buttons into the Add Disk Offering dialog (we can ignore
> Compute
> > Offerings for 4.2 since my feature doesn't yet support them).
> >
> > Let's just called these radio buttons 1) Hypervisor QoS and 2) Storage
> QoS
> > for the purpose of this e-mail.
> >
> > By default, neither radio button is selected and no QoS fields are
> visible.
> >
> > If the user selects the Storage QoS radio button, then the Custom IOPS
> > checkbox and the Min and Max text fields are made visible.
> >
> > If the user changes his mind and selects the Hypervisor QoS radio button,
> > then the Custom IOPS checkbox and the Min and Max text fields disappear
> and
> > are replaced by the two Hypervisor QoS text fields.
> >
> > This way, the user can choose neither QoS option or one of them or the
> > other, but never both.
> >
> > On the API side, I was thinking of having logic in place when a request
> > comes in to create a Disk Offering to confirm these fields are the way we
> > want them.
> >
> > Once we know the Disk Offering is in order, a user can create a data disk
> > from it. Since we checked the validity of the Disk Offering when it was
> > created, the VM should never be asked to use Hypervisor QoS when Storage
> > QoS in being utilized.
> >
> > Does that make sense or did I miss something?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:54 PM, John Burwell 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Mike,
> >>
> >> Looking through the code, I am trying to understand how
> >> CreateDiskOfferingCmd would have the context to identify the conflict.
> >> Naively, it seems to me that this rule would need to be enforced when a
> >> virtual machine is being deployed.  Looking through the code, it seems
> like
> >> we should add a private validateStorageQoS method to
> >> com.cloud.vm.UserVmManagerImpl to check this condition and throws a
> >> ResourceAllocationException when the QoS definitions are inconsistent.
>   We
> >> would then add calls to it from each of the VM creation methods in the
> >> service.  Do this type of approach sound reasonable?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> -John
> >>
> >> On Jun 12, 2013, at 4:30 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi John,
> >>>
> >>> So, here's what I was planning to do. Of course feel free to correct me
> >> on
> >>> this approach.
> >>>
> >>> I think it's OK if Wei merges his code into master and then I can draw
> >> from
> >>> the main repo and merge master into mine locally.
> >>>
> >>> 1) Once I get Wei's code and merge, I plan to add a little GUI code to
> >> make
> >>> it user friendly (toggle between these features on the Add Disk
> Offering
> >>> window).
> >>>
> >>> 2) I plan to write validation logic for the create-disk-offering API
> >>> command which throws an exception if the rules are not followed (this
> >>> should never be triggered from the GUI since the GUI will have controls
> >> in
> >>> place to toggle between the one feature and the other).
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure about documentation. I haven't had much experience with it
> >> on
> >>> CloudStack projects yet.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:21 PM, John Burwell 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
>  Mike,
> 
>  Yes, these server-side rails need to be defined and implemented before
>  either patch can be merged.  From my perspective, I would like to see
> >> the
>  rule implemented in the hypervisor as part of the validation of the
> >> virtual
>  machine definition.  We also need to make sure that this mutual
> >> exclusion
>  is documented.  Do we usually include this type

Re: Test halting build every now and then

[Mike Tutkowski]

In my case, I see it when running

mvn -P developer,systemvm clean install

from the Terminal in Mac OS X.

Removing clean seems to give it a better shoot at not halting.


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:11 PM, Sheng Yang  wrote:

> Eclipse didn't complain for me.
>
> BTW: I am using Linux as development environment.
>
> --Sheng
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Daan Hoogland <
> dhoogl...@schubergphilis.com
> > wrote:
>
> > Macosx?
> > Eclipse?
> >
> > I will try on windows sometime soon (with wireless).
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Sheng Yang [mailto:sh...@yasker.org]
> > Sent: woensdag 12 juni 2013 22:37
> > To: 
> > Subject: Re: Test halting build every now and then
> >
> > I tried to look into this, but it's really hard for me to reproduce
> it(I've
> > run the case for 50 times and no show of the issue).
> >
> > The bash command I used is: for i in {1..50}; do mvn -Dtest=NioTest test
> > -pl utils; done
> >
> > From the log, it looks like server is up but client didn't connect to the
> > server. The correct log of whole process should be:
> >
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:50,079 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Test
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:50,103 INFO  [utils.nio.NioServer]
> > (NioTestServer-Selector:) NioConnection started and listening on
> > 0.0.0.0/0.0.0.0:
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:50,109 INFO  [utils.nio.NioClient]
> > (NioTestServer-Selector:) Connecting to 127.0.0.1:
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:50,351 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
> > (NioTestServer-Handler-1:) Server: Received CONNECT task
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:50,388 INFO  [utils.nio.NioClient]
> > (NioTestServer-Selector:) SSL: Handshake done
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:50,389 INFO  [utils.nio.NioClient]
> > (NioTestServer-Selector:) Connected to 127.0.0.1:
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:50,389 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
> > (NioTestServer-Handler-1:) Client: Received CONNECT task
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:51,406 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Client:
> Data
> > sent
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:51,406 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Client:
> Data
> > sent
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:51,556 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
> > (NioTestServer-Handler-2:) Server: Received DATA task
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:51,597 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
> > (NioTestServer-Handler-3:) Server: Received DATA task
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:51,834 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
> > (NioTestServer-Handler-2:) Verify done.
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:51,856 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest]
> > (NioTestServer-Handler-3:) Verify done.
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:52,406 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Client
> > stopped.
> > 2013-06-12 13:30:52,407 INFO  [utils.testcase.NioTest] (main:) Server
> > stopped.
> >
> > I've tried wireless network, still unable to reproduce.
> >
> > Is there anything else may affect the reproducibility? I thought it was a
> > racy issue, but cannot prove it, since client is not up at all in your
> > case.
> >
> > --Sheng
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 9:25 AM, Mike Tutkowski <
> > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Daan,
> > >
> > > Yeah, now that you remind me, I believe we did talk about a wireless
> > setup
> > > possibly being behind this a while ago. :)
> > >
> > > When I'm working from home, I am on a wireless network.
> > >
> > > In the office, my primary connection is via cable, but I do have
> another
> > > connection to the Internet via wireless.
> > >
> > > It's not the end of the world when this problem occurs. I just CTRL-C
> and
> > > try again, but I thought if someone had a solution that perhaps I
> didn't
> > > see that I could implement it on my side.
> > >
> > > Thanks for your time!!
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Daan Hoogland <
> > > dhoogl...@schubergphilis.com
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > H Mike,
> > > >
> > > > I had this too, working from my home machine and got some hint on
> this
> > > > list, stating a wireless interface on your machine might be the
> > problem.
> > > I
> > > > haven't been able to pinpoint the culprit yet. What is your setup?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Daan Hoogland
> > > >
> > > > -Original Message-
> > > > From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com]
> > > > Sent: woensdag 12 juni 2013 1:19
> > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: Test halting build every now and then
> > > >
> > > > Took five tries to get the build over this hump a moment ago.
> > > >
> > > > Any thoughts on what's going on there?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> > > > mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Does anyone know if there is a way to stop the build from (very
> > often)
> > > > > halting here indefinitely?
> > > > >
> > > > > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,836 INFO  [utils.net.NetUtilsTest] (main:) IP
> is
> > > > > 1234:5678::dd3b:e82c:ce6b:fe5c
> > > > > 2013-06-04 12:19:47,839 INFO  [utils.net.NetUtilsTest] (main:) IP
> is
> > > > > 1234:5678::814

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[John Burwell]

Mike,

That is one possibility.  The other possibility is that hypervisor is going to 
throttle I/O on all disks attached.  Therefore, we need answers to the 
following questions:

1. Is I/O throttling applied to the root disk or all disks attached to 
the VM?
2. If I/O throttling is applied to all disks, how is the throttling 
distributed amongst the disks if only one read/write value is defined?

Thanks,
-John

On Jun 12, 2013, at 5:13 PM, Mike Tutkowski  
wrote:

> Hey John,
> 
> Perhaps I don't fully understand how Wei's feature works.
> 
> I guess I thought if you choose Hypervisor QoS, you do so on Compute
> Offerings (root disks) and/or Disk Offerings (data disks).
> 
> From my thinking, you're root disk could be under Hypervisor QoS, but your
> data disk could be under Storage QoS.
> 
> Is that incorrect?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:10 PM, John Burwell  wrote:
> 
>> Mike,
>> 
>> As I understand these two patches, the throttled I?O settings are applied
>> from the hypervisor side, and possibly defined in a compute offering where
>> provisioned IOPS are defined on the storage side through disk offerings.  I
>> don't see how the management server could enforce this mutual exclusion
>> between provisioned IOPS and throttled I/O until a compute and disk
>> offering were selected.  These selections come together when we deploy a
>> VM.  Based on these assumptions, I would expect to see enforcement of this
>> rule in UI at the time of VM creation/definition and on the server side, as
>> part of the VM creation.  It feels like any attempt to enforce this rule
>> when defining offering would be premature, and unnecessarily limit
>> flexibility.  Are my assumptions and understanding correct?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -John
>> 
>> On Jun 12, 2013, at 5:04 PM, Mike Tutkowski 
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi John,
>>> 
>>> So, maybe I'm wrong about this, but what I was thinking is that we'd
>> build
>>> two radio buttons into the Add Disk Offering dialog (we can ignore
>> Compute
>>> Offerings for 4.2 since my feature doesn't yet support them).
>>> 
>>> Let's just called these radio buttons 1) Hypervisor QoS and 2) Storage
>> QoS
>>> for the purpose of this e-mail.
>>> 
>>> By default, neither radio button is selected and no QoS fields are
>> visible.
>>> 
>>> If the user selects the Storage QoS radio button, then the Custom IOPS
>>> checkbox and the Min and Max text fields are made visible.
>>> 
>>> If the user changes his mind and selects the Hypervisor QoS radio button,
>>> then the Custom IOPS checkbox and the Min and Max text fields disappear
>> and
>>> are replaced by the two Hypervisor QoS text fields.
>>> 
>>> This way, the user can choose neither QoS option or one of them or the
>>> other, but never both.
>>> 
>>> On the API side, I was thinking of having logic in place when a request
>>> comes in to create a Disk Offering to confirm these fields are the way we
>>> want them.
>>> 
>>> Once we know the Disk Offering is in order, a user can create a data disk
>>> from it. Since we checked the validity of the Disk Offering when it was
>>> created, the VM should never be asked to use Hypervisor QoS when Storage
>>> QoS in being utilized.
>>> 
>>> Does that make sense or did I miss something?
>>> 
>>> Thanks
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:54 PM, John Burwell 
>> wrote:
>>> 
 Mike,
 
 Looking through the code, I am trying to understand how
 CreateDiskOfferingCmd would have the context to identify the conflict.
 Naively, it seems to me that this rule would need to be enforced when a
 virtual machine is being deployed.  Looking through the code, it seems
>> like
 we should add a private validateStorageQoS method to
 com.cloud.vm.UserVmManagerImpl to check this condition and throws a
 ResourceAllocationException when the QoS definitions are inconsistent.
>>  We
 would then add calls to it from each of the VM creation methods in the
 service.  Do this type of approach sound reasonable?
 
 Thanks,
 -John
 
 On Jun 12, 2013, at 4:30 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
>> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
 wrote:
 
> Hi John,
> 
> So, here's what I was planning to do. Of course feel free to correct me
 on
> this approach.
> 
> I think it's OK if Wei merges his code into master and then I can draw
 from
> the main repo and merge master into mine locally.
> 
> 1) Once I get Wei's code and merge, I plan to add a little GUI code to
 make
> it user friendly (toggle between these features on the Add Disk
>> Offering
> window).
> 
> 2) I plan to write validation logic for the create-disk-offering API
> command which throws an exception if the rules are not followed (this
> should never be triggered from the GUI since the GUI will have controls
 in
> place to toggle between the one feature and the other).
> 
> I'm not sure about documentation. I haven't had muc

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

[Mike Tutkowski]

OK, we will have to wait for Wei on that one.

My guess (and that's all it is is a guess) is since Wei's four new fields
have been added to both the Add Compute Offering and the Add Disk Offering
dialogs is that Hypervisor QoS is on a disk-by-disk basis. Otherwise you
could have conflicting information from disks that were created from
different Disk Offerings.


On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:22 PM, John Burwell  wrote:

> Mike,
>
> That is one possibility.  The other possibility is that hypervisor is
> going to throttle I/O on all disks attached.  Therefore, we need answers to
> the following questions:
>
> 1. Is I/O throttling applied to the root disk or all disks
> attached to the VM?
> 2. If I/O throttling is applied to all disks, how is the
> throttling distributed amongst the disks if only one read/write value is
> defined?
>
> Thanks,
> -John
>
> On Jun 12, 2013, at 5:13 PM, Mike Tutkowski 
> wrote:
>
> > Hey John,
> >
> > Perhaps I don't fully understand how Wei's feature works.
> >
> > I guess I thought if you choose Hypervisor QoS, you do so on Compute
> > Offerings (root disks) and/or Disk Offerings (data disks).
> >
> > From my thinking, you're root disk could be under Hypervisor QoS, but
> your
> > data disk could be under Storage QoS.
> >
> > Is that incorrect?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 3:10 PM, John Burwell 
> wrote:
> >
> >> Mike,
> >>
> >> As I understand these two patches, the throttled I?O settings are
> applied
> >> from the hypervisor side, and possibly defined in a compute offering
> where
> >> provisioned IOPS are defined on the storage side through disk
> offerings.  I
> >> don't see how the management server could enforce this mutual exclusion
> >> between provisioned IOPS and throttled I/O until a compute and disk
> >> offering were selected.  These selections come together when we deploy a
> >> VM.  Based on these assumptions, I would expect to see enforcement of
> this
> >> rule in UI at the time of VM creation/definition and on the server
> side, as
> >> part of the VM creation.  It feels like any attempt to enforce this rule
> >> when defining offering would be premature, and unnecessarily limit
> >> flexibility.  Are my assumptions and understanding correct?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> -John
> >>
> >> On Jun 12, 2013, at 5:04 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi John,
> >>>
> >>> So, maybe I'm wrong about this, but what I was thinking is that we'd
> >> build
> >>> two radio buttons into the Add Disk Offering dialog (we can ignore
> >> Compute
> >>> Offerings for 4.2 since my feature doesn't yet support them).
> >>>
> >>> Let's just called these radio buttons 1) Hypervisor QoS and 2) Storage
> >> QoS
> >>> for the purpose of this e-mail.
> >>>
> >>> By default, neither radio button is selected and no QoS fields are
> >> visible.
> >>>
> >>> If the user selects the Storage QoS radio button, then the Custom IOPS
> >>> checkbox and the Min and Max text fields are made visible.
> >>>
> >>> If the user changes his mind and selects the Hypervisor QoS radio
> button,
> >>> then the Custom IOPS checkbox and the Min and Max text fields disappear
> >> and
> >>> are replaced by the two Hypervisor QoS text fields.
> >>>
> >>> This way, the user can choose neither QoS option or one of them or the
> >>> other, but never both.
> >>>
> >>> On the API side, I was thinking of having logic in place when a request
> >>> comes in to create a Disk Offering to confirm these fields are the way
> we
> >>> want them.
> >>>
> >>> Once we know the Disk Offering is in order, a user can create a data
> disk
> >>> from it. Since we checked the validity of the Disk Offering when it was
> >>> created, the VM should never be asked to use Hypervisor QoS when
> Storage
> >>> QoS in being utilized.
> >>>
> >>> Does that make sense or did I miss something?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 2:54 PM, John Burwell 
> >> wrote:
> >>>
>  Mike,
> 
>  Looking through the code, I am trying to understand how
>  CreateDiskOfferingCmd would have the context to identify the conflict.
>  Naively, it seems to me that this rule would need to be enforced when
> a
>  virtual machine is being deployed.  Looking through the code, it seems
> >> like
>  we should add a private validateStorageQoS method to
>  com.cloud.vm.UserVmManagerImpl to check this condition and throws a
>  ResourceAllocationException when the QoS definitions are inconsistent.
> >>  We
>  would then add calls to it from each of the VM creation methods in the
>  service.  Do this type of approach sound reasonable?
> 
>  Thanks,
>  -John
> 
>  On Jun 12, 2013, at 4:30 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> >> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
>  wrote:
> 
> > Hi John,
> >
> > So, here's what I was planning to do. Of course feel free to correct
> me
>  on
> > this approach.
> >
> > I think