Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router
The current scope is limited to VR. If a service fails to restart after certain cycles then monit will timeout, log the event. In this case admin has to interfere, solve the issue in the service and add it to monit again. Thanks, Jayapal On 01-Oct-2013, at 11:16 AM, Koushik Das koushik@citrix.com wrote: This is a very useful feature. Can this be extended to the other system VMs? SSVM and CPVM Based on the discussion I see that there is an assumption that restarting services/rebooting should fix the issues. Is that always true? What if the service fails to restart after repeated attempts? What is the fallback? -Koushik On 01-Oct-2013, at 3:15 AM, Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com wrote: Good idea. If x and y and z are borked, initiate shutdown? More generically, it seems we need some form of in-VM automation that can co-ordinate with top-level orchestration On 9/28/13 4:14 AM, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: Even when always restarting on every glitch we need to monitor the inside of the vr to know when to restart/respin a new vr. There is much functionality present on the vr an for us it is not possible to say for sure what is important to a customer installation so the admin should be able to define the minimal reqs that will stop us from spinning up a new vr. And there must be tools present for monitoring these reqs. makes sense? On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:01 PM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote: For what it's worth we created an ACS-specific MIB (beneath the org.apache MIB) so really this is just a matter of defining and publishing it. But lets think about monit being used to restart services - with HA, Redundant VR, are we sure that we want to inject yet another point of control into things? Is it better to just respawn an instance since they are essentially stateless? I don't know, but management server, local daemons, and other SysVMs making decisions seems like we are increasing complexity. --David On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com wrote: In this case you would have to invent another enterprise MIB. Not too hard, but I'd argue that it needs to be proxied through some other service anyway and it represents a different integration point with ACS. Depends on whether you consider the system vm part of the ACS deployment, or an entity like a host. On 9/26/13 10:27 AM, Alex Huang alex.hu...@citrix.com wrote: Using SNMP for alert notification is not a bad idea though. I don't see why we can't do that instead of posting to the management server. This is specifically referring to the second part of the proposal. Why reinvent that part of it? --Alex -Original Message- From: Chiradeep Vittal [mailto:chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2013 10:28 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router SNMP wouldn't restart a failed process nor would it generate alerts. It is simply too generic for the requirements outlined here. The proposal does not talk about modifying monit, just using it. That wouldn't trigger the AGPL. I think the idea is to have a tight monitoring loop that scales: so executing the monitoring loop in-situ makes sense. On 9/25/13 9:53 PM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote: On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Jayapal Reddy Uradi jayapalreddy.ur...@citrix.com wrote: Hi, Currently in virtual router there is no way to recover and notify if some service goes down unexpectedly. This feature is about monitoring all the services rendered by the virtual router, ensure that the services are running through the life time of the VR. On service failure: 1. Generate an alert and event indicating failure 2. Restart the service Services to be monitored: DHCP, DNS, haproxy, password server etc. As part of monitoring there are two activities 1. One is monitoring the services in VR and log the events. Using monit for monitoring services 2. Second part is pushing alerts from router to MS server. Thinking on POST the logs to web server in MS. I will be updating more details and FS in this thread. I created enhancement bug for this. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4736 Thanks, Jayapal So several things - why not make this via SNMP? Query processes, and many other things. This should be relatively simple, is well known, can be locked down (or could be monitored for many other things by external monitoring packages) and is the defacto standard for monitoring hosts. Second - monit is Affero GPL licensed - which is a cat-x license. While I expect that we would merely use this and not do any hacking on it - I think its inclusion might be a surprise (and forbidden in many environments) to our users --David
Review Request 14426: Tests for Netscaler support as external LB Provider in VPC
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/14426/ --- Review request for cloudstack, Rajesh Battala, venkata swamy babu budumuru, and Prasanna Santhanam. Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-4776 Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Created tests for Netscaler as external LB provider in VPC Used ddt to achieve this without adding new tests but modifying the existing tests Created new network_offering_vpcNS Handled addition on NS as optional in setup - if NS addition fails, the non-NS tests still work and NS tests alone will be skipped Removed the creation of vpc Offering for each test, instead, using Default offering test_03_create_network_netscaler is no more valid - removed it. I am adding new tests for NS as external LB provider. So this is not needed. Diffs - test/integration/component/test_vpc_network.py 970a625 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/14426/diff/ Testing --- Tested script locally. Long running script... Latest run looks good so far. output so far: Test create network in VPC ... ok Test create network in VPC ... ok Test create network in VPC mismatched services (Should fail) ... ok Test create network in VPC mismatched services (Should fail) ... ok Test create multiple networks with LB service (Should fail) ... ok Test create multiple networks with LB service (Should fail) ... ok Test create network with external LB devices ... ok Test create network with redundant router capability ... SKIP: skipped - RvR didn't support VPC currently Test create network services not supported by VPC (Should fail) ... ok Test create network without sourceNAT service in VPC (should fail) ... ok Test create network with shared network offering ... ok Test create network with shared network offering ... ok Test create network with conserve mode ON ... ok Test create network with conserve mode ON ... ok Test network gc after shutdown of vms in the network ... FAIL Test network rules after starting a VpcVr that was shutdown after network.gc ... ok Test Stop all the Vms that are part of the a Network ... ok Test create network outside cidr range of VPC ... ok Test create network outside cidr range of VPC ... ok Test create network outside cidr range of VPC ... ok Test create network inside cidr range of VPC ... ok Test create network inside cidr range of VPC ... ok Test create network overlapping cidr range of VPC ... Thanks, Sowmya Krishnan
Re: Review Request 14405: ConstantTimeBackoff test and cleanup
On Sept. 30, 2013, 6:12 p.m., Darren Shepherd wrote: utils/src/com/cloud/utils/backoff/impl/ConstantTimeBackoff.java, line 60 https://reviews.apache.org/r/14405/diff/1/?file=359645#file359645line60 I wouldn't log at WARN level for this, can you change to DEBUG. Hitting that catch block is expected as part of the wakeup behavior Laszlo Hornyak wrote: Can we agree in an INFO level log? It seems it is not a usual flow of events, but caused by administrator interaction through a JMX (see ConstantTimeBackoffMBean) Darren Shepherd wrote: How about INFO, but don't print stack trace (so e.getMessage())? I'd rather it not look like an error. Or maybe not log the exception at all as its seems misleading. I hate to debate over log statements, so change if you want or not. I'll commit this when you close the issue. Ok, agreed. It is not an error and the stack trace would be the same all the time. I will fix this. - Laszlo --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/14405/#review26503 --- On Sept. 30, 2013, 8:27 p.m., Laszlo Hornyak wrote: --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/14405/ --- (Updated Sept. 30, 2013, 8:27 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- - javadoc changed - the old one was copy-pasted from AgentShell - start and stop method removed - they did the same as the overridden methods - _counter removed as it was only written, but never read - remove from _asleep map was moved to a finally block, to make sure it is removed even in case of the thread gets interrupted - Tests created for the above scenarios. Diffs - agent/src/com/cloud/agent/AgentShell.java bf1e818 utils/src/com/cloud/utils/backoff/impl/ConstantTimeBackoff.java 976e369 utils/test/com/cloud/utils/backoff/impl/ConstantTimeBackoffTest.java PRE-CREATION Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/14405/diff/ Testing --- test included Thanks, Laszlo Hornyak
Re: Scaling up cpu and memory of user vm above host capacity
Thanks David. That disabuses my confusion about the CPU provisioning. I was using the wrong API to scale up the virtual machine, so above observations stand invalid till I get the same results with the right API. About over-provisioning, I have the over provisioning factor set as 1 both in case of CPU and memory. Regards, Gaurav On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:55 PM, David Ortiz dpor...@outlook.com wrote: A machine won't be able to support more cores on a VM than the physical processor. That should result in problems trying to deploy it. I'm guessing the service offering is still valid since you could add a host later which has a hex core or two cpus in it. As far as RAM goes, do you have overprovisioning enabled? From: gaurav.arad...@clogeny.com Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 14:00:04 +0530 Subject: Scaling up cpu and memory of user vm above host capacity To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Hi, I am trying to automate a scenario here. I have only one host in cluster with 4 CPU cores and 15 GB total memory. When I try to scale up cpu and RAM of a running user vm above the host capacity, it doesn't throw any error and I can see the updated values in VM statistics too. For CPU, I am able to change the service offering of user vm as 5 cores * 100 MHz (even though host has 4 cores). I am not sure how this calculation is done. Definitely many no. of virtual cores can be formed on host (more than 4), but is it possible to allocate 5 cores to single VM ? When I try to deploy new VM with 5 core CPU service offering, then in this case it fails saying not enough server capacity. Also, For memory, I am able to create 17 GB memory service offering and allocate it to any running user vm (although the total memory on host is 15 GB). Any directions? Is this an issue or am I missing something here? Regards, Gaurav
Re: Review Request 14320: add boolean option httpModeEnabled to the service offering for use in haproxy conf
Ok Chiradeep, I see where you worries are. I'll study the stickiness implementation. If it is not a zone wide thing I'll consider it. I disagree that the feature is implementation specific. The tuning is. And the tuning the feature are not the same. The abstraction of the feature httpClose, which is only implemented by haproxy (let's assume) as a set of options is the reason for someone to choose for this implementation of a load balancer. This should be leveraged. Actually in the Schuberg Philis implementation it must. The solution that is now done at the actual site is hacked into the running VR. This will then lead to an emergency if the router is recreated for some reason. regards, Daan On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 11:50 PM, Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com wrote: My point is that it is a tuning that is specific for HAProxy and shouldn't be exposed in an abstraction like the CS API. (After all, how do I choose, as an end-user Offering A with httpClose or offering B without httpClose). If there is another desirable feature Y in Netscaler, do you anticipate changing another dozen files for that feature? If you look at the stickiness policy feature, it isn't tied to the service offering despite there being some differences between stickiness capabilities between different LB providers. On 9/28/13 4:18 AM, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: Chiradeep, the network offerings are created by the cloud operator aren't they? The netscaler en f5 modules will have to implement it's own behavior on httpClose. in case of haproxy it means no mode http and option httpclose (and some other things) If you define it zone wide every tenant has the same setting whilst you want this to tune setting (like with maxConnections) for a tenant. regards, Daan On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 10:57 PM, Chiradeep Vittal chirade...@gmail.comwrote: This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/14320/ Not sure if this should be in the API since it is a HAProxy-specific configuration. This wouldn't apply to Netscaler or F5. After all the end user has no idea if he is using HAProxy of Netscaler or F5. Likely this flag is of interest to the cloud operator only, so why not put it in zone-wide config instead of the network offering. Do you really see someone creating 2 offerings: one with HttpClose and one without HttpClose? - Chiradeep Vittal On September 26th, 2013, 7:01 p.m. UTC, daan Hoogland wrote: Review request for cloudstack and Wei Zhou. By daan Hoogland. *Updated Sept. 26, 2013, 7:01 p.m.* *Bugs: * CLOUDSTACK-4328 *Repository: * cloudstack-git Description add boolean option httpModeEnabled to the service offering for use in haproxy conf Testing created unit test. instantiated a network with some loadbalancer rule based on a netoffer with the option to true/false and maxconnections to a non default value - checked haproxy.cfg on the router Diffs - api/src/com/cloud/offering/NetworkOffering.java (6c5573e) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/ApiConstants.java (f85784b) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/network/CreateNetworkOffe ringCmd.java (bdad904) - api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/network/UpdateNetworkOffe ringCmd.java (c9c4c8a) - core/src/com/cloud/agent/api/routing/LoadBalancerConfigCommand.java (ee29290) - core/src/com/cloud/network/HAProxyConfigurator.java (2309125) - core/test/com/cloud/network/HAProxyConfiguratorTest.java (PRE-CREATION) - engine/components-api/src/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManager.ja va (5e1b9b5) - engine/orchestration/src/org/apache/cloudstack/engine/orchestration/Netwo rkOrchestrator.java (53f64fd) - engine/schema/src/com/cloud/offerings/NetworkOfferingVO.java (eefdc94) - plugins/network-elements/elastic-loadbalancer/src/com/cloud/network/lb/El asticLoadBalancerManagerImpl.java (ecd6006) - plugins/network-elements/internal-loadbalancer/src/org/apache/cloudstack/ network/lb/InternalLoadBalancerVMManagerImpl.java (587ae99) - server/src/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManagerImpl.java (8a0f7a6) - server/src/com/cloud/network/router/VirtualNetworkApplianceManagerImpl.ja va (7c026a4) - server/test/com/cloud/vpc/MockConfigurationManagerImpl.java (c9a0480) - server/test/org/apache/cloudstack/networkoffering/CreateNetworkOfferingTe st.java (1f1fb75) - setup/db/db/schema-420to430.sql (44a884d) View Diff https://reviews.apache.org/r/14320/diff/
RE: CloudStack Server Memory Requirements
Marcus, Thanks for the pointer. After some experimentation, I was able to get the system to function with 1GB or RAM, but no less. I changed the -XX:PermSize / -XX:MaxPermSize settings from 512 / 800 to 256 / 512. ORIGINAL JAVA_OPTS=-Djava.awt.headless=true -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.port=45219 -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.authenticate=false -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.ssl=false -Xmx2g -XX:+HeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError -XX:HeapDumpPath=/var/log/cloudstack/management/ -XX:PermSize=512M -XX:MaxPermSize=800m NEW JAVA_OPTS=-Djava.awt.headless=true -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.port=45219 -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.authenticate=false -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.ssl=false -Xmx2g -XX:+HeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError -XX:HeapDumpPath=/var/log/cloudstack/management/ -XX:PermSize=256M -XX:MaxPermSize=512m I was actually able to drop these values lower, but the CSMAN VM still needs 1GB of RAM regardless so something else must be hogging the RAM. Whilst this now works with a 1GB Memory Allowance for the CloudStack Management Server, it is still x2 what CloudStack 4.1 needed. For building test environments on a Laptop in Virtual Box with a separate Host VM such as XenServer 6.2, every MB of RAM is critical. Fortunately I have lots of real hardware at my disposal but not everyone does hence my quest to be able to build a test environment on a Latptop with only 4GB of RAM. If anyone on the DEV List has any ideas how we can get CloudStack 4.2 to run on 512 MB of RAM like 4.1 did I would be happy to test their theories. Regards Geoff Higginbottom D: +44 20 3603 0542 | S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447968161581 geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com -Original Message- From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com] Sent: 30 September 2013 16:17 To: Geoff Higginbottom Cc: chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com; dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: CloudStack Server Memory Requirements Edit JAVA_OPTS in /etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6.conf (or whatever file your system uses) and adjust the memory settings as desired. On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 4:43 AM, Geoff Higginbottom geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com wrote: Marcus, Chiradeep, You've both made reference to the 'Spring Refactor', any chance you can let me know how I go about changing this so I can run CloudStack on a 1GB (or less) foot print, rather than the current 2GB. Regards Geoff Higginbottom D: +44 20 3603 0542 | S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447968161581 geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com -Original Message- From: Geoff Higginbottom [mailto:geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com] Sent: 27 September 2013 08:57 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: RE: CloudStack Server Memory Requirements All, Thanks for all the replies, now a simple question, what do I need to change to test it? Regards Geoff Higginbottom D: +44 20 3603 0542 | S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447968161581 geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com -Original Message- From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com] Sent: 26 September 2013 20:29 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: CloudStack Server Memory Requirements If I recall, we were able to start running it in devcloud again with only 1G of memory allocated to dom0 just a few weeks after the initial spring merge. I just think the default was never set back. On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com wrote: I believe Darren's proposed Spring refactor will help greatly. On 9/26/13 7:41 AM, Marcus Sorensen shadow...@gmail.com wrote: I think its an artifact from the Spring stuff six months ago. We can probably decrease that in the default tomcat conf now. On Sep 26, 2013 6:11 AM, Geoff Higginbottom geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com wrote: I¹ve been testing the 4.2 release of CloudStack using Virtual Box and have noticed a need to allocate significantly more memory to the VM. Previously I would use a CentOS VM with 1 GB of RAM for the installation but then drop the memory to 512MB, leaving plenty of RAM on the host machine to then stand up a XenServer VM or a KVM VM etc. I initially had problems logging into 4.2 after a clean install, and discovered that only by increasing the memory to 2GB could I get the system to function. I am quite shocked that the memory footprint has increased 400% between releases. Obviously for a real production system, allocating more than 2GB or RAM to CloudStack is not an issue, but it does make standing up a simple test environment in Virtual Box more difficult. Does anyone have ideas why this has increased and is it something that should be looked at. Regards Geoff Higginbottom *CTO / Cloud Architect* This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or
Error in backing up cloud database
Dear all, I tried to perform another upgrade today with Abhinav's assistance, and right now I am not able to backup the cloud database. This is the error when doing mysqldump: root@pri-db-01:~/backup/20131001# mysqldump -u cloud -p cloud cloudstack-backup3.sql Enter password: mysqldump: Couldn't execute 'show create table `template_view`': View 'cloud.template_view' references invalid table(s) or column(s) or function(s) or definer/invoker of view lack rights to use them (1356) When I tried to do a select command to the table directly, I got this error message: mysql select * from template_view; ERROR 1356 (HY000): View 'cloud.template_view' references invalid table(s) or column(s) or function(s) or definer/invoker of view lack rights to use them We noted that the problem started to happen last week when I performed a failed upgrade attempt from 4.1.1 to 4.2.0. At that time, the database was already upgraded but because of some issues, we needed to revert back to 4.1.1 and I did a restore of the 4.1.1 version database. However, there was no error message during restoration and CloudStack was running fine since then so I didn't realise about this problem until today when I perform another upgrade attempt. Anyone has encountered this problem before and what can we do to resolve this problem? Looking forward to your reply, thank you. Cheers.
Re: student interested in getting involved with a cloud-based project
Hi April, This project was done over the summer by a Google Summer of Code student. If you join IRC #cloudstack on free node we can talk about other projects that might interest you. -Sebastien On Oct 1, 2013, at 6:55 AM, Tamang, Apil tamang...@students.ecu.edu wrote: Hi, I am a graduate student in Software Engineering. I thought I might be interested in trying out on the project titled 'GSoC: Add GRE SDN controller support for KVM hosts.' Let me know if this project is still up for the taking. Regards, Apil
Re: Review Request 13238: JIRA-3701 : VM instantiation : Sending network information to a new VM instance
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/13238/ --- (Updated Oct. 1, 2013, 1:46 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Abstract/suggestion: While a VM is instantiated, CloudStack could also send the following information if need be : - the instance name (CS uuid) - the display name - VM tags - network information (IPv4, IPv6, netmask, routing, gateway, mac address, etc.) just if we activate some global settings such as : - vm.instance.boot.network.required (true/false) - vm.instance.boot.vmname (true/false) - vm.instance.boot.uuid (true/false) - vm.instance.boot.tags (true/false) Applications: - A VM could discover its network and dialog with physical and virtual machines, etc. - A VM do not need a virtual router - According of this type of information (tags, names, …) , management servers could be able to configure and deploy correctly VMs. Diffs - plugins/hypervisors/xen/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/xen/resource/CitrixResourceBase.java 7173f0b plugins/hypervisors/xen/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/xen/resource/XenServer56FP1Resource.java 11a7b42 server/src/com/cloud/configuration/Config.java c815c77 server/src/com/cloud/vm/VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java 1fb118f Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/13238/diff/ Testing --- Set global settings : instanciantion of VMs : checking if extra parameters are corrected and well send (even in base64URLSafe + / = - _) Thanks, Nicolas FOATA
Re: Review Request 13238: JIRA-3701 : VM instantiation : Sending network information to a new VM instance
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/13238/ --- (Updated Oct. 1, 2013, 1:46 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack and Chiradeep Vittal. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Abstract/suggestion: While a VM is instantiated, CloudStack could also send the following information if need be : - the instance name (CS uuid) - the display name - VM tags - network information (IPv4, IPv6, netmask, routing, gateway, mac address, etc.) just if we activate some global settings such as : - vm.instance.boot.network.required (true/false) - vm.instance.boot.vmname (true/false) - vm.instance.boot.uuid (true/false) - vm.instance.boot.tags (true/false) Applications: - A VM could discover its network and dialog with physical and virtual machines, etc. - A VM do not need a virtual router - According of this type of information (tags, names, …) , management servers could be able to configure and deploy correctly VMs. Diffs - plugins/hypervisors/xen/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/xen/resource/CitrixResourceBase.java 7173f0b plugins/hypervisors/xen/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/xen/resource/XenServer56FP1Resource.java 11a7b42 server/src/com/cloud/configuration/Config.java c815c77 server/src/com/cloud/vm/VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java 1fb118f Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/13238/diff/ Testing --- Set global settings : instanciantion of VMs : checking if extra parameters are corrected and well send (even in base64URLSafe + / = - _) Thanks, Nicolas FOATA
Re: Review Request 13896: JIRA-3702 : VM instantiation : specific information for hypervisors
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/13896/ --- (Updated Oct. 1, 2013, 1:46 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack and Chiradeep Vittal. Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- Abstract/suggestion: While a VM is instantiated, Cloudstack could send and add furthermore data for the hypervisor coming from a new field such as 'Other options/Other configuration' for example in the 'Compute offering' screen. Thus, each hypervisor could decide whether it want to process the data and how or to do not take it into account. With a such input, Cloudstack will be able to use the specificity and the full power of each hypervisor. Applications: 1) On XCP, it will be possible to branch some pci straightforwardly (via pci passthrough) 2) To use the more efficiently the min, max memories (static and/or dynamic) Please feel free to modify the text if you to find better and sexy application examples with this two kinds of features and of course to correct mistakes. Diffs - api/src/com/cloud/offering/ServiceOffering.java 45d5f38 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/ApiConstants.java 00d526d api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/command/admin/offering/CreateServiceOfferingCmd.java decac29 api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/ServiceOfferingResponse.java 288f76b client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages.properties 3e775e0 client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages_fr_FR.properties 284fde8 engine/schema/src/com/cloud/migration/ServiceOffering21VO.java 7a49e63 engine/schema/src/com/cloud/service/ServiceOfferingVO.java 9a262c5 plugins/hypervisors/xen/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/xen/resource/CitrixResourceBase.java 7173f0b plugins/hypervisors/xen/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/xen/resource/XenServer56FP1Resource.java 11a7b42 server/src/com/cloud/api/query/vo/ServiceOfferingJoinVO.java 05ff5f3 server/src/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManager.java e06488e server/src/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManagerImpl.java 6c32c55 server/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/HypervisorGuruBase.java 6d368bd server/src/com/cloud/vm/UserVmManagerImpl.java e4d1c78 server/src/com/cloud/vm/VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java 1fb118f server/test/com/cloud/vpc/MockConfigurationManagerImpl.java 840f539 setup/db/42betaTo43.sql PRE-CREATION setup/db/create-schema.sql 79550ae ui/dictionary.jsp eec0264 ui/scripts/configuration.js 68f38ec ui/scripts/docs.js 6537646 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/13896/diff/ Testing --- Thanks, Nicolas FOATA
[ANNOUNCE] Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 Released
The Apache CloudStack project is excited to announce the 4.2 feature release of the CloudStack cloud orchestration platform. This is the next feature release of the 4.0 branch which first released on November 6, 2012 with the 4.1 release on June 5. This is the second major release from Apache CloudStack since its graduation from the Apache Incubator on March 20th. This release represents over six months of work from the Apache CloudStack community with 57 new and 29 improved features being provided. Many new features incorporate contributions from major corporations and support for industry standards. New integrated support of the Cisco UCS compute chassis, SolidFire storage arrays, and the S3 storage protocol are just a few of the features available in this release. ## Documentation The 4.2 release includes over 160 issues from 4.1.0 and 4.1.1 were fixed; including fixes for swift support, fixes to documentation, and more. Please see the Release Notes for a full list of corrected issues and upgrade instructions. The official installation, administration and API documentation for each release are available on our Documentation Page. ## Downloads The official source code for the 4.2 release can be downloaded from our Downloads Page. In addition to the official source code release, individual contributors have also made convenience binaries available on the Apache CloudStack download page. ## Apache CloudStack Apache CloudStack is an integrated Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) software platform that allows users to build feature-rich public and private cloud environments. CloudStack includes an intuitive user interface and rich APIs for managing the compute, networking, software, and storage infrastructure resources. The project became an Apache top level project in March 2013. For additional marketing or communications information, please contact the marketing mailing list. To learn how to join and contribute to the Apache CloudStack community please visit our website. Animesh Chaturvedi Committer Apache CloudStack anim...@apache.org
RE: [RESULTS] [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (sixth round)
-Original Message- From: Chip Childers [mailto:chipchild...@apache.org] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 11:55 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [RESULTS] [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (sixth round) On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 06:48:00PM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote: [Animesh] Chip so should I go ahead and publish the website? For the announcement tomorrow, I have to send an email to dev, user, marketing mailing list at 7 AM PST (10 AM EST) right? Let me know if I missed anything Please don't do the website yet. We've discussed on marketing@, and I'll take care of publishing it tomorrow at 9 AM ET (6 AM PT). I will also publish the announcement to the CloudStack blog at 10 AM ET (concurrent with you emailing the announcement out), and do some tweeting from @CloudStack. As for the announcement, it should go out in separate emails to the following lists: us...@cloudstack.apache.org d...@cloudstack.apacehe.org annou...@cloudstack.apache.org annou...@apache.org The announcement email should be sent from your *apache.org* email address. [Animesh] Done sent the release announcement. Let me know if you have any issues! -chip
Announcement emails...
Animesh, I've not moderated the emails through, hoping that I can get you to re-send them to include URLs for our site and the download page. -chip
RE: Announcement emails...
Ok will resend them with links in few minutes. Formatting the text with all the 6 links.. From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 7:18 AM To: Animesh Chaturvedi; dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Announcement emails... Animesh, I've not moderated the emails through, hoping that I can get you to re-send them to include URLs for our site and the download page. -chip
Re: student interested in getting involved with a cloud-based project
2013/10/1 Tamang, Apil tamang...@students.ecu.edu I am a graduate student in Software Engineering. I thought I might be interested in trying out on the project titled 'GSoC: Add GRE SDN controller support for KVM hosts.' Hi Tamang, This project was done on coding, now in review and testing process. Thanks for interesting, -- N.g.U.y.e.N.A.n.H.t.U
Re: [RESULTS] [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (sixth round)
Did you guys tagged the release yet? I don't see the tag on git... Francois On 2013-10-01 10:16 AM, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote: -Original Message- From: Chip Childers [mailto:chipchild...@apache.org] Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 11:55 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [RESULTS] [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (sixth round) On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 06:48:00PM +, Animesh Chaturvedi wrote: [Animesh] Chip so should I go ahead and publish the website? For the announcement tomorrow, I have to send an email to dev, user, marketing mailing list at 7 AM PST (10 AM EST) right? Let me know if I missed anything Please don't do the website yet. We've discussed on marketing@, and I'll take care of publishing it tomorrow at 9 AM ET (6 AM PT). I will also publish the announcement to the CloudStack blog at 10 AM ET (concurrent with you emailing the announcement out), and do some tweeting from @CloudStack. As for the announcement, it should go out in separate emails to the following lists: us...@cloudstack.apache.org d...@cloudstack.apacehe.org annou...@cloudstack.apache.org annou...@apache.org The announcement email should be sent from your *apache.org* email address. [Animesh] Done sent the release announcement. Let me know if you have any issues! -chip -- Francois Gaudreault Architecte de Solution Cloud | Cloud Solutions Architect fgaudrea...@cloudops.com 514-629-6775 - - - CloudOps 420 rue Guy Montréal QC H3J 1S6 www.cloudops.com @CloudOps_
Re: [RESULTS] [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack 4.2.0 (sixth round)
On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 10:26:11AM -0400, Francois Gaudreault wrote: Did you guys tagged the release yet? I don't see the tag on git... Francois Thanks for the reminder. I've tagged the release and pushed. https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=tag;h=refs/tags/4.2.0 -chip
[ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland
The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked Daan Hoogland to join the PMC and we are pleased to announce that they have accepted. Join me in congratulating Daan! -The CloudStack PMC
Re: Error in backing up cloud database
Dear all, We just realised that the 'template_view' is a new view introduced only on Cloudstack database version 4.2. CloudStack 4.1.1 doesn't have this. It seems that during my failed upgrade attempt last time, I did a restore of the 4.1.1 database over the existing 4.2 database (instead of over an empty database), causing some new views/tables introduced on 4.2 still exists on my restored 4.1.1 database. Anyone can advise how can I do a clean-up of the existing database so that I can do a proper upgrade from 4.1.1 to 4.2? Other than template_view, any other view/tables or column (on an existing table) I need to delete? Looking forward to your reply, thank you. Cheers. On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 9:25 PM, Indra Pramana in...@sg.or.id wrote: Dear all, I tried to perform another upgrade today with Abhinav's assistance, and right now I am not able to backup the cloud database. This is the error when doing mysqldump: root@pri-db-01:~/backup/20131001# mysqldump -u cloud -p cloud cloudstack-backup3.sql Enter password: mysqldump: Couldn't execute 'show create table `template_view`': View 'cloud.template_view' references invalid table(s) or column(s) or function(s) or definer/invoker of view lack rights to use them (1356) When I tried to do a select command to the table directly, I got this error message: mysql select * from template_view; ERROR 1356 (HY000): View 'cloud.template_view' references invalid table(s) or column(s) or function(s) or definer/invoker of view lack rights to use them We noted that the problem started to happen last week when I performed a failed upgrade attempt from 4.1.1 to 4.2.0. At that time, the database was already upgraded but because of some issues, we needed to revert back to 4.1.1 and I did a restore of the 4.1.1 version database. However, there was no error message during restoration and CloudStack was running fine since then so I didn't realise about this problem until today when I perform another upgrade attempt. Anyone has encountered this problem before and what can we do to resolve this problem? Looking forward to your reply, thank you. Cheers.
[RESULTS][VOTE] Accept the donation of a Contrail plugin into Apache CloudStack
With 13 +1 votes, and no other votes, this passes. I'll work with Pedro and Juniper to complete the donation. -chip On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 01:13:07PM -0400, Chip Childers wrote: Hi all! As stated in other threads, Juniper is proposing the donation of a Contrail plugin to Apache CloudStack. The code itself has been posted to reviewboard [1]. The design has been documented by Pedro [2]. [1] https://reviews.apache.org/r/14325/ [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Contrail+network+plugin I'm calling a vote here, so that we have a formal consensus on accepting the code into the project. As I've suggested earlier, I'd like us to accept the code into a branch, and then work through any technical concerns / reviews / changes prior to a master branch merge. So... voting will end in ~72 hours. As this is a technical decision, committer and PMC votes are binding. -chip Votes please! [ ] +1 - Accept the donation [ ] +/-0 - No strong opinion [ ] -1 - Do not accept the donation
RE: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland
Congrats Dan Kind Regards Giles D: +44 20 3603 0541 | M: +44 796 111 2055 giles.sir...@shapeblue.com -Original Message- From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] Sent: 01 October 2013 15:48 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked Daan Hoogland to join the PMC and we are pleased to announce that they have accepted. Join me in congratulating Daan! -The CloudStack PMC This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company incorporated in England Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a company incorporated in India and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated in Brasil and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.
Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com wrote: SNMP wouldn't restart a failed process nor would it generate alerts. It is simply too generic for the requirements outlined here. The proposal does not talk about modifying monit, just using it. That wouldn't trigger the AGPL. Let me restate my objection to anything AGPL. People are largely comfortable with GPLv2 software - Linux is ubiquitous. Many legal departments routinely prohibit GPLv3 software (we actually saw this when CS was GPLv3 licensed.) But the Affero GPL license is anathema in many corporate environments, and by forcing it on folks in the default System VM I fear it will hurt adoption of CloudStack. --David
Add Network to Instance
Hello, I assumed the Add Network to VM meant, the ability to add an additional IP address to an existing VM. However, getting he error message the nic already exists.
Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 05:27:57AM +, Chiradeep Vittal wrote: The proposal does not talk about modifying monit, just using it. That wouldn't trigger the AGPL. The proposal talks about using it, and that's enough to trigger the AGPL. This is a *very bad* thing IMO. For example, $dayjob would require that we work around this in our environment (i.e.: not deploy it). Please please please don't bring in an AGPL package. This isn't an ASF category X issue, since we are talking about usage. It's actually a larger issue for users though. Many legal departments would consider the use of software with that license to trigger the requirement for that organization to publish the source. -chip
Re: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland
Congrats! - Original Message - From: Rajesh Battala rajesh.batt...@citrix.com To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 8:58:53 AM Subject: RE: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland Congrats Daan :) -Original Message- From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 8:18 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked Daan Hoogland to join the PMC and we are pleased to announce that they have accepted. Join me in congratulating Daan! -The CloudStack PMC
Re: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland
Congratulations, Daan! On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Rajesh Battala rajesh.batt...@citrix.comwrote: Congrats Daan :) -Original Message- From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 8:18 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked Daan Hoogland to join the PMC and we are pleased to announce that they have accepted. Join me in congratulating Daan! -The CloudStack PMC -- *Mike Tutkowski* *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com o: 303.746.7302 Advancing the way the world uses the cloudhttp://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play *™*
Re: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland
Daan, congratulations! -Alena. From: Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.commailto:chip.child...@sungard.com Reply-To: dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org Date: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 7:47 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.orgmailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked Daan Hoogland to join the PMC and we are pleased to announce that they have accepted. Join me in congratulating Daan! -The CloudStack PMC
Re: Add Network to Instance
A network is not just an ip. A network is a distinct entity consisting of an ip range, netmask, broadcast, an isolation type. They are the items you see when you go to the UI and hit 'network', or do an API call 'listNetworks'. The 'add network to vm' essentially plugs a new NIC into that VM and puts it on the network you specify. On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 9:44 AM, Maurice Lawler maurice.law...@me.com wrote: Hello, I assumed the Add Network to VM meant, the ability to add an additional IP address to an existing VM. However, getting he error message the nic already exists.
Re: CloudStack Server Memory Requirements
Don't forget -Xmx2g ... -Xmxn Specify the maximum size, in bytes, of the memory allocation pool. This value must a multiple of 1024 greater than 2MB. Your total memory used will at most be something like Xmx + MaxPermSize On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 3:48 AM, Geoff Higginbottom geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com wrote: Marcus, Thanks for the pointer. After some experimentation, I was able to get the system to function with 1GB or RAM, but no less. I changed the -XX:PermSize / -XX:MaxPermSize settings from 512 / 800 to 256 / 512. ORIGINAL JAVA_OPTS=-Djava.awt.headless=true -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.port=45219 -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.authenticate=false -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.ssl=false -Xmx2g -XX:+HeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError -XX:HeapDumpPath=/var/log/cloudstack/management/ -XX:PermSize=512M -XX:MaxPermSize=800m NEW JAVA_OPTS=-Djava.awt.headless=true -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.port=45219 -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.authenticate=false -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.ssl=false -Xmx2g -XX:+HeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError -XX:HeapDumpPath=/var/log/cloudstack/management/ -XX:PermSize=256M -XX:MaxPermSize=512m I was actually able to drop these values lower, but the CSMAN VM still needs 1GB of RAM regardless so something else must be hogging the RAM. Whilst this now works with a 1GB Memory Allowance for the CloudStack Management Server, it is still x2 what CloudStack 4.1 needed. For building test environments on a Laptop in Virtual Box with a separate Host VM such as XenServer 6.2, every MB of RAM is critical. Fortunately I have lots of real hardware at my disposal but not everyone does hence my quest to be able to build a test environment on a Latptop with only 4GB of RAM. If anyone on the DEV List has any ideas how we can get CloudStack 4.2 to run on 512 MB of RAM like 4.1 did I would be happy to test their theories. Regards Geoff Higginbottom D: +44 20 3603 0542 | S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447968161581 geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com -Original Message- From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com] Sent: 30 September 2013 16:17 To: Geoff Higginbottom Cc: chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com; dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: CloudStack Server Memory Requirements Edit JAVA_OPTS in /etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6.conf (or whatever file your system uses) and adjust the memory settings as desired. On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 4:43 AM, Geoff Higginbottom geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com wrote: Marcus, Chiradeep, You've both made reference to the 'Spring Refactor', any chance you can let me know how I go about changing this so I can run CloudStack on a 1GB (or less) foot print, rather than the current 2GB. Regards Geoff Higginbottom D: +44 20 3603 0542 | S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447968161581 geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com -Original Message- From: Geoff Higginbottom [mailto:geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com] Sent: 27 September 2013 08:57 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: RE: CloudStack Server Memory Requirements All, Thanks for all the replies, now a simple question, what do I need to change to test it? Regards Geoff Higginbottom D: +44 20 3603 0542 | S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447968161581 geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com -Original Message- From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com] Sent: 26 September 2013 20:29 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: CloudStack Server Memory Requirements If I recall, we were able to start running it in devcloud again with only 1G of memory allocated to dom0 just a few weeks after the initial spring merge. I just think the default was never set back. On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com wrote: I believe Darren's proposed Spring refactor will help greatly. On 9/26/13 7:41 AM, Marcus Sorensen shadow...@gmail.com wrote: I think its an artifact from the Spring stuff six months ago. We can probably decrease that in the default tomcat conf now. On Sep 26, 2013 6:11 AM, Geoff Higginbottom geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com wrote: I¹ve been testing the 4.2 release of CloudStack using Virtual Box and have noticed a need to allocate significantly more memory to the VM. Previously I would use a CentOS VM with 1 GB of RAM for the installation but then drop the memory to 512MB, leaving plenty of RAM on the host machine to then stand up a XenServer VM or a KVM VM etc. I initially had problems logging into 4.2 after a clean install, and discovered that only by increasing the memory to 2GB could I get the system to function. I am quite shocked that the memory footprint has increased 400% between releases. Obviously for a real production system, allocating more than 2GB or RAM to CloudStack is not an issue, but it does make standing up a simple test environment in Virtual Box more difficult. Does anyone have ideas why this has increased and is it
Unable to create instance after upgrading to CloudStack 4.2.0
Dear all, I am having problems of unable to create new instances after upgrading to 4.2.0. The error message is: Failed to increment resource count of type primary_storage for account id=2 Excerpt from management-server.log: 2013-10-02 00:40:57,770 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiServlet] (catalina-exec-15:null) ===START=== -- GET command=queryAsyncJobResultjobId=183063da-fb08-425b-8057-157e33320674response=jsonsessionkey=VEyky3f1rsQVfLVs9pGg2sXh60o%3D_=1380645646739 2013-10-02 00:40:57,785 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiDispatcher] (catalina-exec-16:null) InfrastructureEntity name is:com.cloud.offering.ServiceOffering 2013-10-02 00:40:57,791 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiDispatcher] (catalina-exec-16:null) ControlledEntity name is:com.cloud.template.VirtualMachineTemplate 2013-10-02 00:40:57,795 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiDispatcher] (catalina-exec-16:null) ControlledEntity name is:com.cloud.network.Network 2013-10-02 00:40:57,798 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiDispatcher] (catalina-exec-16:null) InfrastructureEntity name is:com.cloud.offering.DiskOffering 2013-10-02 00:40:57,813 DEBUG [cloud.network.NetworkModelImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Service SecurityGroup is not supported in the network id=238 2013-10-02 00:40:57,828 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiServlet] (catalina-exec-15:null) ===END=== -- GET command=queryAsyncJobResultjobId=183063da-fb08-425b-8057-157e33320674response=jsonsessionkey=VEyky3f1rsQVfLVs9pGg2sXh60o%3D_=1380645646739 2013-10-02 00:40:57,867 DEBUG [cloud.vm.UserVmManagerImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Allocating in the DB for vm 2013-10-02 00:40:57,887 DEBUG [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Allocating entries for VM: VM[User|Test-Upgrade-420] 2013-10-02 00:40:57,888 DEBUG [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Allocating nics for VM[User|Test-Upgrade-420] 2013-10-02 00:40:57,889 DEBUG [cloud.network.NetworkManagerImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Allocating nic for vm VM[User|Test-Upgrade-420] in network Ntwk[238|Guest|7] with requested profile NicProfile[0-0-null-null-null 2013-10-02 00:40:57,909 DEBUG [cloud.network.NetworkModelImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Service SecurityGroup is not supported in the network id=238 2013-10-02 00:40:57,911 DEBUG [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Allocating disks for VM[User|Test-Upgrade-420] 2013-10-02 00:40:57,930 ERROR [cloud.resourcelimit.ResourceLimitManagerImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Failed to update resource count for account id=2 2013-10-02 00:40:57,931 DEBUG [db.Transaction.Transaction] (catalina-exec-16:null) Rolling back the transaction: Time = 74 Name = createVirtualMachine; called by -Transaction.rollback:898-Transaction.removeUpTo:841-Transaction.close:665-TransactionContextBuilder.interceptComplete:56-ComponentInstantiationPostProcessor$InterceptorDispatcher.intercept:131-ResourceLimitManagerImpl.incrementResourceCount:238-VolumeManagerImpl.allocateTemplatedVolume:1477-VirtualMachineManagerImpl.allocate:386-ComponentInstantiationPostProcessor$InterceptorDispatcher.intercept:125-CloudOrchestrator.createVirtualMachine:214-UserVmManagerImpl.createVirtualMachine:2867-ComponentInstantiationPostProcessor$InterceptorDispatcher.intercept:125 2013-10-02 00:40:57,978 ERROR [cloud.api.ApiServer] (catalina-exec-16:null) unhandled exception executing api command: deployVirtualMachine com.cloud.utils.exception.CloudRuntimeException: Failed to increment resource count of type primary_storage for account id=2 Looking forward to your reply, thank you. Cheers.
Error when taking host out of maintenance
Anyone able to dycpher what htis is trying to tell me ? - Maurice 013-10-01 12:54:41,347 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl] (Job-Executor-10:job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-d71eb78bc0fb ]) MessageBus message: host reserved capacity released for VM: 1, checking if host reservation can be released for host:1 2013-10-01 12:54:41,354 DEBUG [cloud.resource.ResourceManagerImpl] (Job-Executor-10:job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-d71eb78bc0fb ]) Sent resource event EVENT_CANCEL_MAINTENANCE_AFTER to listener CapacityManagerImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_55a560e8 2013-10-01 12:54:41,354 ERROR [cloud.async.AsyncJobManagerImpl] (Job-Executor-10:job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-d71eb78bc0fb ]) Unexpected exception while executing org.apache.cloudstack.api.command.admin.host.CancelMaintenanceCmd com.cloud.utils.exception.CloudRuntimeException: Internal error cancelling maintenance. at com.cloud.resource.ResourceManagerImpl.cancelMaintenance(ResourceManagerImpl.java:1156) at org.apache.cloudstack.api.command.admin.host.CancelMaintenanceCmd.execute(CancelMaintenanceCmd.java:101) at com.cloud.api.ApiDispatcher.dispatch(ApiDispatcher.java:158) at com.cloud.async.AsyncJobManagerImpl$1.run(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:531) at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471) at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask$Sync.innerRun(FutureTask.java:334) at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:166) at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1146) at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:679) 2013-10-01 12:54:41,356 DEBUG [cloud.async.AsyncJobManagerImpl] (Job-Executor-10:job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-d71eb78bc0fb ]) Complete async job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-d71eb78bc0fb ], jobStatus: 2, resultCode: 530, result: Error Code: 530 Error text: Internal error cancelling maintenance. 2013-10-01 12:54:42,380 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiServlet] (catalina-exec-21:null) ===START=== -- GET command=queryAsyncJobResultjobId=9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-d71eb78bc0fbresponse=jsonsessionkey=e3ePddUCCz2xG%2FTvAbZ8jspIpvw%3D_=1380646468186
[POLL] Latency between Management Server and zones
[Apologize for the crosspost, but I think there may be answers from the dev perspective] [Also, this is poll / opinion question] What is the maximum latency / minimum bandwidth folks have between their Management Server and the hypervisor? What works? What needs to be tweaked? TIA
Re: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland
Congratulations, Daan. -min On 10/1/13 7:47 AM, Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com wrote: The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked Daan Hoogland to join the PMC and we are pleased to announce that they have accepted. Join me in congratulating Daan! -The CloudStack PMC
Re: Scaling up cpu and memory of user vm above host capacity
Gaurav - Were you trying this on a stopped vm ? If you try and start it with an offering above the host capacity (including over provisioning ) then it shouldn't start. Let me know how it goes. More details on scale vm feature @ https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Dynamic+scaling+of+C PU+and+RAM On 01/10/13 12:02 AM, Gaurav Aradhye gaurav.arad...@clogeny.com wrote: Thanks David. That disabuses my confusion about the CPU provisioning. I was using the wrong API to scale up the virtual machine, so above observations stand invalid till I get the same results with the right API. About over-provisioning, I have the over provisioning factor set as 1 both in case of CPU and memory. Regards, Gaurav On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:55 PM, David Ortiz dpor...@outlook.com wrote: A machine won't be able to support more cores on a VM than the physical processor. That should result in problems trying to deploy it. I'm guessing the service offering is still valid since you could add a host later which has a hex core or two cpus in it. As far as RAM goes, do you have overprovisioning enabled? From: gaurav.arad...@clogeny.com Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2013 14:00:04 +0530 Subject: Scaling up cpu and memory of user vm above host capacity To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Hi, I am trying to automate a scenario here. I have only one host in cluster with 4 CPU cores and 15 GB total memory. When I try to scale up cpu and RAM of a running user vm above the host capacity, it doesn't throw any error and I can see the updated values in VM statistics too. For CPU, I am able to change the service offering of user vm as 5 cores * 100 MHz (even though host has 4 cores). I am not sure how this calculation is done. Definitely many no. of virtual cores can be formed on host (more than 4), but is it possible to allocate 5 cores to single VM ? When I try to deploy new VM with 5 core CPU service offering, then in this case it fails saying not enough server capacity. Also, For memory, I am able to create 17 GB memory service offering and allocate it to any running user vm (although the total memory on host is 15 GB). Any directions? Is this an issue or am I missing something here? Regards, Gaurav
RE: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland
Congrats Daan -Original Message- From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 7:48 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked Daan Hoogland to join the PMC and we are pleased to announce that they have accepted. Join me in congratulating Daan! -The CloudStack PMC
Re: Error when taking host out of maintenance
I've gotten errors canceling maintenance too, but it still worked (host was enabled afterward) so I haven't dug into it yet. On Oct 1, 2013 10:57 AM, Maurice Lawler maurice.law...@me.com wrote: Anyone able to dycpher what htis is trying to tell me ? - Maurice 013-10-01 12:54:41,347 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.**DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl] (Job-Executor-10:job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-**d71eb78bc0fb ]) MessageBus message: host reserved capacity released for VM: 1, checking if host reservation can be released for host:1 2013-10-01 12:54:41,354 DEBUG [cloud.resource.**ResourceManagerImpl] (Job-Executor-10:job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-**d71eb78bc0fb ]) Sent resource event EVENT_CANCEL_MAINTENANCE_AFTER to listener CapacityManagerImpl_**EnhancerByCloudStack_55a560e8 2013-10-01 12:54:41,354 ERROR [cloud.async.**AsyncJobManagerImpl] (Job-Executor-10:job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-**d71eb78bc0fb ]) Unexpected exception while executing org.apache.cloudstack.api.** command.admin.host.**CancelMaintenanceCmd com.cloud.utils.exception.**CloudRuntimeException: Internal error cancelling maintenance. at com.cloud.resource.**ResourceManagerImpl.**cancelMaintenance(** ResourceManagerImpl.java:1156) at org.apache.cloudstack.api.**command.admin.host.** CancelMaintenanceCmd.execute(**CancelMaintenanceCmd.java:101) at com.cloud.api.ApiDispatcher.**dispatch(ApiDispatcher.java:**158) at com.cloud.async.**AsyncJobManagerImpl$1.run(** AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:531) at java.util.concurrent.**Executors$RunnableAdapter.** call(Executors.java:471) at java.util.concurrent.**FutureTask$Sync.innerRun(** FutureTask.java:334) at java.util.concurrent.**FutureTask.run(FutureTask.**java:166) at java.util.concurrent.**ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(** ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1146) at java.util.concurrent.**ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(** ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.**java:679) 2013-10-01 12:54:41,356 DEBUG [cloud.async.**AsyncJobManagerImpl] (Job-Executor-10:job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-**d71eb78bc0fb ]) Complete async job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-**d71eb78bc0fb ], jobStatus: 2, resultCode: 530, result: Error Code: 530 Error text: Internal error cancelling maintenance. 2013-10-01 12:54:42,380 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiServlet] (catalina-exec-21:null) ===START=== -- GET command=queryAsyncJobResult**jobId=9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-** d71eb78bc0fbresponse=json**sessionkey=e3ePddUCCz2xG%** 2FTvAbZ8jspIpvw%3D_=**1380646468186
Re: CloudStack Server Memory Requirements
CloudStack should start and run for a small setup fine with a 256m heap. Obviously you should probably run with more in a production setup. I'm running the following opts on centos6.4 JAVA_OPTS=-Djava.awt.headless=true -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.port=45219 -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.authenticate=false -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.ssl=false -Xmx256m -XX:+HeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError -XX:HeapDumpPath=/var/log/cloudstack/management/ -XX:PermSize=128m -XX:MaxPermSize=256m That puts the resident memory around 600mb. This is obviously a very minimal setup, if I was to put much load on it the GC would probably thrash the CPU. Darren On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 2:48 AM, Geoff Higginbottom geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com wrote: Marcus, Thanks for the pointer. After some experimentation, I was able to get the system to function with 1GB or RAM, but no less. I changed the -XX:PermSize / -XX:MaxPermSize settings from 512 / 800 to 256 / 512. ORIGINAL JAVA_OPTS=-Djava.awt.headless=true -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.port=45219 -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.authenticate=false -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.ssl=false -Xmx2g -XX:+HeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError -XX:HeapDumpPath=/var/log/cloudstack/management/ -XX:PermSize=512M -XX:MaxPermSize=800m NEW JAVA_OPTS=-Djava.awt.headless=true -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.port=45219 -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.authenticate=false -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote.ssl=false -Xmx2g -XX:+HeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError -XX:HeapDumpPath=/var/log/cloudstack/management/ -XX:PermSize=256M -XX:MaxPermSize=512m I was actually able to drop these values lower, but the CSMAN VM still needs 1GB of RAM regardless so something else must be hogging the RAM. Whilst this now works with a 1GB Memory Allowance for the CloudStack Management Server, it is still x2 what CloudStack 4.1 needed. For building test environments on a Laptop in Virtual Box with a separate Host VM such as XenServer 6.2, every MB of RAM is critical. Fortunately I have lots of real hardware at my disposal but not everyone does hence my quest to be able to build a test environment on a Latptop with only 4GB of RAM. If anyone on the DEV List has any ideas how we can get CloudStack 4.2 to run on 512 MB of RAM like 4.1 did I would be happy to test their theories. Regards Geoff Higginbottom D: +44 20 3603 0542 | S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447968161581 geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com -Original Message- From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com] Sent: 30 September 2013 16:17 To: Geoff Higginbottom Cc: chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com; dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: CloudStack Server Memory Requirements Edit JAVA_OPTS in /etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6.conf (or whatever file your system uses) and adjust the memory settings as desired. On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 4:43 AM, Geoff Higginbottom geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com wrote: Marcus, Chiradeep, You've both made reference to the 'Spring Refactor', any chance you can let me know how I go about changing this so I can run CloudStack on a 1GB (or less) foot print, rather than the current 2GB. Regards Geoff Higginbottom D: +44 20 3603 0542 | S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447968161581 geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com -Original Message- From: Geoff Higginbottom [mailto:geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com] Sent: 27 September 2013 08:57 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: RE: CloudStack Server Memory Requirements All, Thanks for all the replies, now a simple question, what do I need to change to test it? Regards Geoff Higginbottom D: +44 20 3603 0542 | S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447968161581 geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com -Original Message- From: Marcus Sorensen [mailto:shadow...@gmail.com] Sent: 26 September 2013 20:29 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: CloudStack Server Memory Requirements If I recall, we were able to start running it in devcloud again with only 1G of memory allocated to dom0 just a few weeks after the initial spring merge. I just think the default was never set back. On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com wrote: I believe Darren's proposed Spring refactor will help greatly. On 9/26/13 7:41 AM, Marcus Sorensen shadow...@gmail.com wrote: I think its an artifact from the Spring stuff six months ago. We can probably decrease that in the default tomcat conf now. On Sep 26, 2013 6:11 AM, Geoff Higginbottom geoff.higginbot...@shapeblue.com wrote: I¹ve been testing the 4.2 release of CloudStack using Virtual Box and have noticed a need to allocate significantly more memory to the VM. Previously I would use a CentOS VM with 1 GB of RAM for the installation but then drop the memory to 512MB, leaving plenty of RAM on the host machine to then stand up a XenServer VM or a KVM VM etc. I initially had problems logging into 4.2 after a clean install, and
Re: Review Request 14405: ConstantTimeBackoff test and cleanup
--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/14405/ --- (Updated Oct. 1, 2013, 5:32 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack. Changes --- No stack trace logged in this version Repository: cloudstack-git Description --- - javadoc changed - the old one was copy-pasted from AgentShell - start and stop method removed - they did the same as the overridden methods - _counter removed as it was only written, but never read - remove from _asleep map was moved to a finally block, to make sure it is removed even in case of the thread gets interrupted - Tests created for the above scenarios. Diffs (updated) - agent/src/com/cloud/agent/AgentShell.java bf1e818 utils/src/com/cloud/utils/backoff/impl/ConstantTimeBackoff.java 976e369 utils/test/com/cloud/utils/backoff/impl/ConstantTimeBackoffTest.java PRE-CREATION Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/14405/diff/ Testing --- test included Thanks, Laszlo Hornyak
Re: ovirt/RHEV-M support
Hi Jithin, What is the key advantage of this solution? You want to have some oVirt specific features in CS? e.g. CPU tuning or some exotic qemu devices? However, if you want to work on such project, I may be able to help you. I used to be oVirt maintainer, now I am more active around CS. If you feel brave enough to start working on such an integration feel free to contact me :) On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 6:07 PM, Jithin Raju rajuj...@gmail.com wrote: yes, Regards, Jithin On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 10:28 PM, Laszlo Hornyak laszlo.horn...@gmail.comwrote: Ok, so you want to keep your rhevm but you want to use (start/stop/create/delete/etc) its resources (CS, storage, networks, vms) in CS? On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 6:13 PM, Jithin Raju rajuj...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I meant managing ovirt managed resources using cs. Thanks, Jithin On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Laszlo Hornyak laszlo.horn...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Exactly what support do you mean? Migration from rhevm to CS? :-) On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Jithin Raju rajuj...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Is there any plan to support ovirt/RHEV-M ? Thanks, Jithin -- EOF -- EOF -- EOF
Re: Error when taking host out of maintenance
Are you using the new systemvm image? On Oct 1, 2013, at 1:37 PM, Maurice Lawler maurice.law...@me.com wrote: Since upgrading, and restarting system VM's, nothing is coming back online. System VM's are still in starting state, nothing in the way of error messages in the logs. Did you or anyone else encounter this and if so, how was it resolved. On 10/1/13, 1:19 PM, Marcus Sorensen wrote: I've gotten errors canceling maintenance too, but it still worked (host was enabled afterward) so I haven't dug into it yet. On Oct 1, 2013 10:57 AM, Maurice Lawler maurice.law...@me.com wrote: Anyone able to dycpher what htis is trying to tell me ? - Maurice 013-10-01 12:54:41,347 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.**DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl] (Job-Executor-10:job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-**d71eb78bc0fb ]) MessageBus message: host reserved capacity released for VM: 1, checking if host reservation can be released for host:1 2013-10-01 12:54:41,354 DEBUG [cloud.resource.**ResourceManagerImpl] (Job-Executor-10:job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-**d71eb78bc0fb ]) Sent resource event EVENT_CANCEL_MAINTENANCE_AFTER to listener CapacityManagerImpl_**EnhancerByCloudStack_55a560e8 2013-10-01 12:54:41,354 ERROR [cloud.async.**AsyncJobManagerImpl] (Job-Executor-10:job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-**d71eb78bc0fb ]) Unexpected exception while executing org.apache.cloudstack.api.** command.admin.host.**CancelMaintenanceCmd com.cloud.utils.exception.**CloudRuntimeException: Internal error cancelling maintenance. at com.cloud.resource.**ResourceManagerImpl.**cancelMaintenance(** ResourceManagerImpl.java:1156) at org.apache.cloudstack.api.**command.admin.host.** CancelMaintenanceCmd.execute(**CancelMaintenanceCmd.java:101) at com.cloud.api.ApiDispatcher.**dispatch(ApiDispatcher.java:**158) at com.cloud.async.**AsyncJobManagerImpl$1.run(** AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:531) at java.util.concurrent.**Executors$RunnableAdapter.** call(Executors.java:471) at java.util.concurrent.**FutureTask$Sync.innerRun(** FutureTask.java:334) at java.util.concurrent.**FutureTask.run(FutureTask.**java:166) at java.util.concurrent.**ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(** ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1146) at java.util.concurrent.**ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(** ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.**java:679) 2013-10-01 12:54:41,356 DEBUG [cloud.async.**AsyncJobManagerImpl] (Job-Executor-10:job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-**d71eb78bc0fb ]) Complete async job-188 = [ 9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-**d71eb78bc0fb ], jobStatus: 2, resultCode: 530, result: Error Code: 530 Error text: Internal error cancelling maintenance. 2013-10-01 12:54:42,380 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiServlet] (catalina-exec-21:null) ===START=== -- GET command=queryAsyncJobResult**jobId=9552b42a-eac5-4744-8323-** d71eb78bc0fbresponse=json**sessionkey=e3ePddUCCz2xG%** 2FTvAbZ8jspIpvw%3D_=**1380646468186
Re: Unable to create instance after upgrading to CloudStack 4.2.0
Dear all, Further investigation reveals that there might be some issues with the schema upgrade. When we check the resource_count table for the account ID: mysql select * from resource_count where account_id=2; +++---+---+---+ | id | account_id | domain_id | type | count | +++---+---+---+ | 17 | 2 | NULL | user_vm |30 | | 18 | 2 | NULL | public_ip | 4 | | 19 | 2 | NULL | volume|40 | | 20 | 2 | NULL | snapshot | 1 | | 21 | 2 | NULL | template |40 | | 22 | 2 | NULL | project | 0 | | 23 | 2 | NULL | network | 2 | | 24 | 2 | NULL | vpc | 0 | +++---+---+---+ There's no 'primary_storage' type there. In comparison, Abhinav's database contains the details: mysql SELECT * FROM cloud.resource_count where account_id=2; +++---+---+-+ | id | account_id | domain_id | type | count | +++---+---+-+ | 17 | 2 | NULL | user_vm | 4 | | 18 | 2 | NULL | public_ip | 1 | | 19 | 2 | NULL | volume| 3 | | 20 | 2 | NULL | snapshot | 3 | | 21 | 2 | NULL | template | 1 | | 22 | 2 | NULL | project | 0 | | 23 | 2 | NULL | network | 2 | | 24 | 2 | NULL | vpc | 1 | | 33 | 2 | NULL | cpu | 2 | | 34 | 2 | NULL | memory|1536 | | 35 | 2 | NULL | primary_storage | 8589934592 | | 36 | 2 | NULL | secondary_storage | 27866955776 | +++---+---+-+ These types are missing from my resource_count table for each of the accounts: | 33 | 2 | NULL | cpu | 2 | | 34 | 2 | NULL | memory|1536 | | 35 | 2 | NULL | primary_storage | 8589934592 | | 36 | 2 | NULL | secondary_storage | 27866955776 | I tried to re-do the schema upgrade manually pertaining to that particular table, which is part of this section under: /usr/share/cloudstack-management/setup/db/schema-410to420.sql DROP VIEW IF EXISTS `cloud`.`account_view`; CREATE VIEW `cloud`.`account_view` AS But I am still not able to get the four types (cpu, memory, primary_storage, secondary_storage) to appear on my resource_count table. Anyone can help? This is my third attempt to upgrade to 4.2.0 and I don't want to revert back again now. Looking forward to your reply, thank you. Cheers. On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Indra Pramana in...@sg.or.id wrote: Dear all, I am having problems of unable to create new instances after upgrading to 4.2.0. The error message is: Failed to increment resource count of type primary_storage for account id=2 Excerpt from management-server.log: 2013-10-02 00:40:57,770 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiServlet] (catalina-exec-15:null) ===START=== -- GET command=queryAsyncJobResultjobId=183063da-fb08-425b-8057-157e33320674response=jsonsessionkey=VEyky3f1rsQVfLVs9pGg2sXh60o%3D_=1380645646739 2013-10-02 00:40:57,785 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiDispatcher] (catalina-exec-16:null) InfrastructureEntity name is:com.cloud.offering.ServiceOffering 2013-10-02 00:40:57,791 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiDispatcher] (catalina-exec-16:null) ControlledEntity name is:com.cloud.template.VirtualMachineTemplate 2013-10-02 00:40:57,795 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiDispatcher] (catalina-exec-16:null) ControlledEntity name is:com.cloud.network.Network 2013-10-02 00:40:57,798 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiDispatcher] (catalina-exec-16:null) InfrastructureEntity name is:com.cloud.offering.DiskOffering 2013-10-02 00:40:57,813 DEBUG [cloud.network.NetworkModelImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Service SecurityGroup is not supported in the network id=238 2013-10-02 00:40:57,828 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiServlet] (catalina-exec-15:null) ===END=== -- GET command=queryAsyncJobResultjobId=183063da-fb08-425b-8057-157e33320674response=jsonsessionkey=VEyky3f1rsQVfLVs9pGg2sXh60o%3D_=1380645646739 2013-10-02 00:40:57,867 DEBUG [cloud.vm.UserVmManagerImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Allocating in the DB for vm 2013-10-02 00:40:57,887 DEBUG [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Allocating entries for VM: VM[User|Test-Upgrade-420] 2013-10-02 00:40:57,888 DEBUG [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Allocating nics for VM[User|Test-Upgrade-420] 2013-10-02 00:40:57,889 DEBUG [cloud.network.NetworkManagerImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Allocating nic for vm
Re: Error when taking host out of maintenance
Seems as though I am running into MULTIPLE errors now. :| 013-10-01 14:49:34,197 ERROR [utils.db.ScriptRunner] (Timer-2:null) com.mysql.jdbc.exceptions.jdbc4.MySQLSyntaxErrorException: Duplicate column name 'default' 2013-10-01 14:49:34,199 ERROR [cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker] (Timer-2:null) Unable to execute upgrade script: /usr/share/cloudstack-management/setup/db/schema-410to420.sql com.mysql.jdbc.exceptions.jdbc4.MySQLSyntaxErrorException: Duplicate column name 'default' at com.cloud.utils.db.ScriptRunner.runScript(ScriptRunner.java:193) at com.cloud.utils.db.ScriptRunner.runScript(ScriptRunner.java:87) at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.runScript(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:201) at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.upgrade(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:262) at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.check(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:391) at com.cloud.utils.component.ComponentContext.initComponentsLifeCycle(ComponentContext.java:90) at com.cloud.servlet.CloudStartupServlet$1.run(CloudStartupServlet.java:54) at java.util.TimerThread.mainLoop(Timer.java:534) at java.util.TimerThread.run(Timer.java:484) 2013-10-01 14:49:34,200 ERROR [cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker] (Timer-2:null) Unable to upgrade the database com.cloud.utils.exception.CloudRuntimeException: Unable to execute upgrade script: /usr/share/cloudstack-management/setup/db/schema-410to420.sql at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.runScript(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:210) at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.upgrade(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:262) at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.check(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:391) at com.cloud.utils.component.ComponentContext.initComponentsLifeCycle(ComponentContext.java:90) at com.cloud.servlet.CloudStartupServlet$1.run(CloudStartupServlet.java:54) at java.util.TimerThread.mainLoop(Timer.java:534) at java.util.TimerThread.run(Timer.java:484) Caused by: com.mysql.jdbc.exceptions.jdbc4.MySQLSyntaxErrorException: Duplicate column name 'default' at com.cloud.utils.db.ScriptRunner.runScript(ScriptRunner.java:193) at com.cloud.utils.db.ScriptRunner.runScript(ScriptRunner.java:87) at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.runScript(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:201) ... 6 more 2013-10-01 14:49:34,201 DEBUG [db.Transaction.Transaction] (Timer-2:null) Rolling back the transaction: Time = 431 Name = -CloudStartupServlet$1.run:52-TimerThread.mainLoop:534-TimerThread.run:484; called by -Transaction.rollback:898-Transaction.removeUpTo:841-Transaction.close:665-DatabaseUpgradeChecker.upgrade:295-DatabaseUpgradeChecker.check:391-ComponentContext.initComponentsLifeCycle:90-CloudStartupServlet$1.run:54-TimerThread.mainLoop:534-TimerThread.run:484 2013-10-01 14:49:34,202 ERROR [utils.component.ComponentContext] (Timer-2:null) System integrity check failed. Refuse to startup com.cloud.utils.exception.CloudRuntimeException: Unable to upgrade the database at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.upgrade(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:293) at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.check(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:391) at com.cloud.utils.component.ComponentContext.initComponentsLifeCycle(ComponentContext.java:90) at com.cloud.servlet.CloudStartupServlet$1.run(CloudStartupServlet.java:54) at java.util.TimerThread.mainLoop(Timer.java:534) at java.util.TimerThread.run(Timer.java:484) Caused by: com.cloud.utils.exception.CloudRuntimeException: Unable to execute upgrade script: /usr/share/cloudstack-management/setup/db/schema-410to420.sql at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.runScript(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:210) at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.upgrade(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:262) ... 5 more Caused by: com.mysql.jdbc.exceptions.jdbc4.MySQLSyntaxErrorException: Duplicate column name 'default' at com.cloud.utils.db.ScriptRunner.runScript(ScriptRunner.java:193) at com.cloud.utils.db.ScriptRunner.runScript(ScriptRunner.java:87) at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.runScript(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:201) ... 6 more On 10/1/13, 1:48 PM, Travis Graham wrote: Are you using the new systemvm image? On Oct 1, 2013, at 1:37 PM, Maurice Lawler maurice.law...@me.com wrote: Since upgrading, and restarting system VM's, nothing is coming back online. System VM's are still in starting state, nothing in the way of error messages in the logs. Did you or anyone else encounter this and if so, how was it resolved. On 10/1/13, 1:19 PM, Marcus Sorensen wrote: I've gotten errors canceling maintenance too, but it still worked (host was enabled afterward) so I haven't dug into it yet. On Oct 1, 2013 10:57 AM, Maurice Lawler maurice.law...@me.com wrote: Anyone able to dycpher what htis is trying to tell me ? - Maurice 013-10-01 12:54:41,347 DEBUG
Re: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland
there is no exit for you now! cloudstack for life!!! Congrats Daan. On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com wrote: Congrats Daan -Original Message- From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 7:48 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked Daan Hoogland to join the PMC and we are pleased to announce that they have accepted. Join me in congratulating Daan! -The CloudStack PMC
RE: my two cents on RBAC/authorization
Darren, Thanks for the feedback and agreed that to make the RBAC solution pluggable, we would need to model it using standard authorization entities. As Min mentioned, this branch is to experiment how closely we can add a true RBAC model to current CloudStack code having account-domain hierarchy and static roles and gauge the effort. From IAM docs and your explanation, Policy is a set of permissions and if it is not passed on then we assume one internally to process the authorization - hopefully we can add that layer later as well, on top of the first phase we are prototyping that focusses on defining Permissions for CloudStack and stores them directly to Db to facilitate read operations. -Prachi -Original Message- From: Min Chen [mailto:min.c...@citrix.com] Sent: Sunday, September 29, 2013 12:04 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: my two cents on RBAC/authorization RBAC branch was created by Prachi and me to do some quick prototype on rbac feature we are going to propose in the community soon. Since it is not ready yet, we haven't proposed and published FS on the ML. In this prototype, we have group, accout, role, permission as our first class object. Unlike Amazon, cloudstack ACL is mainly done at Account level, so our Group will be a collection of accounts instead of users. Different from Darren suggested here, we didn't extract a separate Policy object to Group several permissions to a policy, because we didn't see a big benefit to store collections of permissions as a Json policy object compared to storing each individual permission into a permission table. Another reason why we store individual permission in db table is to facilitate implementing row-level permission filter for list Apis, where we have created DB views to determine entities to be returned. With a separate permission table, we can potentially join that table in db view for row filtering in read operation. In terms of integrating with third-party RBAC system, I don't see a big difference between re-creating policy object using cloudstack defined Json format and asking them to define those permissions through cloudstack provided permission grant Apis. Thanks -min Sent from my iPhone On Sep 28, 2013, at 8:51 PM, Darren Shepherd darren.s.sheph...@gmail.com wrote: I've noticed there's a rbac branch and things are being committed there. I didn't see any documentation about the design or anything (maybe it exists and I looked in the wrong place), so I'm just going to give you my two cents on authorization systems. Hopefully this falls in line with what is being implemented, if not, at least we'll avoid the awkward conversation when its finish when I say the code is marginally useful and should be rewritten. When talking about authorization there's a bunch of terms like principal, permission, subject, action, policy, etc. I want to focus on policy. Policy is central to an authorization system. The policy is the collection of permissions that grant or deny access to some resource or action for a given subject. RBAC is a really just a means to generate a policy. Once you know the user, group, roles, and the permissions of those entities that aggregation of information forms the policy. You then take that policy and use it determine if the given resource/action is granted/denied to a particular subject. It is really important that policy is a first class object in an authorization system. This is important to understand because usually in a big fat enterprise-y company, they really want you to enforce the policy, but not necessarily maintain it. For example, you'll go to your fortune 500 company and they'll tell you they need RBAC. So you go and create an RBAC system. The problem is that the fortune 500 company probably already has a RBAC system, and its probably AD based. So when they said they need RBAC, the really meant you need to enforce RBAC. If you implemented RBAC - Policy - Authorization, your good, if you implemented RBAC - Authorization, your kinda screwed. Now you need to create a system to sync the two RBACs. And keeping data in two places and trying to sync them is never a good idea. Now if you implemented your system as having a policy as a first class object, you can just swap your RBAC for theirs and all is still swell. So if I was to implement this, this is how I'd do it. (And if this sounds a lot like IAM, its because it is. If Amazon got anything right, it's IAM). The authenticator should be able to implement another interface that allows it to supply a Policy object during authentication. This is logical in that the authentication systems quite often hold authorization information too. If the authenticator doesn't implement the interface we fall back to generating the policy ourself. The policy is then consulted to see if the API command
Re: Error when taking host out of maintenance
That error is no longer, now getting an error about vm_snapshot_chain_size being a duplicate. The upgrade script has: ALTER TABLE volumes ADD COLUMN vm_snapshot_chain_size bigint(20) unsigned; Error message is: 2013-10-01 15:03:29,531 DEBUG [db.Transaction.Transaction] (Timer-2:null) Rolling back the transaction: Time = 14 Name = -CloudStartupServlet$1.run:52-TimerThread.mainLoop:534-TimerThread.run:484; called by -Transaction.rollback:898-Transaction.removeUpTo:841-Transaction.close:665-DatabaseUpgradeChecker.upgrade:295-DatabaseUpgradeChecker.check:391-ComponentContext.initComponentsLifeCycle:90-CloudStartupServlet$1.run:54-TimerThread.mainLoop:534-TimerThread.run:484 2013-10-01 15:03:29,532 ERROR [utils.component.ComponentContext] (Timer-2:null) System integrity check failed. Refuse to startup com.cloud.utils.exception.CloudRuntimeException: Unable to upgrade the database at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.upgrade(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:293) at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.check(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:391) at com.cloud.utils.component.ComponentContext.initComponentsLifeCycle(ComponentContext.java:90) at com.cloud.servlet.CloudStartupServlet$1.run(CloudStartupServlet.java:54) at java.util.TimerThread.mainLoop(Timer.java:534) at java.util.TimerThread.run(Timer.java:484) Caused by: com.cloud.utils.exception.CloudRuntimeException: Unable to execute upgrade script: /usr/share/cloudstack-management/setup/db/schema-410to420.sql at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.runScript(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:210) at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.upgrade(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:262) ... 5 more Caused by: com.mysql.jdbc.exceptions.jdbc4.MySQLSyntaxErrorException: Duplicate column name 'vm_snapshot_chain_size' at com.cloud.utils.db.ScriptRunner.runScript(ScriptRunner.java:193) at com.cloud.utils.db.ScriptRunner.runScript(ScriptRunner.java:87) at com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker.runScript(DatabaseUpgradeChecker.java:201) ... 6 more
RE: Unable to create instance after upgrading to CloudStack 4.2.0
Copying Sanjay Animesh -Original Message- From: Indra Pramana [mailto:in...@sg.or.id] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 11:06 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; us...@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: Unable to create instance after upgrading to CloudStack 4.2.0 Dear all, Further investigation reveals that there might be some issues with the schema upgrade. When we check the resource_count table for the account ID: mysql select * from resource_count where account_id=2; +++---+---+---+ | id | account_id | domain_id | type | count | +++---+---+---+ | 17 | 2 | NULL | user_vm |30 | | 18 | 2 | NULL | public_ip | 4 | | 19 | 2 | NULL | volume|40 | | 20 | 2 | NULL | snapshot | 1 | | 21 | 2 | NULL | template |40 | | 22 | 2 | NULL | project | 0 | | 23 | 2 | NULL | network | 2 | | 24 | 2 | NULL | vpc | 0 | +++---+---+---+ There's no 'primary_storage' type there. In comparison, Abhinav's database contains the details: mysql SELECT * FROM cloud.resource_count where account_id=2; +++---+---+-+ | id | account_id | domain_id | type | count | +++---+---+-+ | 17 | 2 | NULL | user_vm | 4 | | 18 | 2 | NULL | public_ip | 1 | | 19 | 2 | NULL | volume| 3 | | 20 | 2 | NULL | snapshot | 3 | | 21 | 2 | NULL | template | 1 | | 22 | 2 | NULL | project | 0 | | 23 | 2 | NULL | network | 2 | | 24 | 2 | NULL | vpc | 1 | | 33 | 2 | NULL | cpu | 2 | | 34 | 2 | NULL | memory|1536 | | 35 | 2 | NULL | primary_storage | 8589934592 | | 36 | 2 | NULL | secondary_storage | 27866955776 | +++---+---+-+ These types are missing from my resource_count table for each of the accounts: | 33 | 2 | NULL | cpu | 2 | | 34 | 2 | NULL | memory|1536 | | 35 | 2 | NULL | primary_storage | 8589934592 | | 36 | 2 | NULL | secondary_storage | 27866955776 | I tried to re-do the schema upgrade manually pertaining to that particular table, which is part of this section under: /usr/share/cloudstack-management/setup/db/schema-410to420.sql DROP VIEW IF EXISTS `cloud`.`account_view`; CREATE VIEW `cloud`.`account_view` AS But I am still not able to get the four types (cpu, memory, primary_storage, secondary_storage) to appear on my resource_count table. Anyone can help? This is my third attempt to upgrade to 4.2.0 and I don't want to revert back again now. Looking forward to your reply, thank you. Cheers. On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 12:49 AM, Indra Pramana in...@sg.or.id wrote: Dear all, I am having problems of unable to create new instances after upgrading to 4.2.0. The error message is: Failed to increment resource count of type primary_storage for account id=2 Excerpt from management-server.log: 2013-10-02 00:40:57,770 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiServlet] (catalina-exec-15:null) ===START=== -- GET command=queryAsyncJobResultjobId=183063da-fb08-425b-8057-157e33320674 response=jsonsessionkey=VEyky3f1rsQVfLVs9pGg2sXh60o%3D_=13806456467 39 2013-10-02 00:40:57,785 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiDispatcher] (catalina-exec-16:null) InfrastructureEntity name is:com.cloud.offering.ServiceOffering 2013-10-02 00:40:57,791 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiDispatcher] (catalina-exec-16:null) ControlledEntity name is:com.cloud.template.VirtualMachineTemplate 2013-10-02 00:40:57,795 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiDispatcher] (catalina-exec-16:null) ControlledEntity name is:com.cloud.network.Network 2013-10-02 00:40:57,798 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiDispatcher] (catalina-exec-16:null) InfrastructureEntity name is:com.cloud.offering.DiskOffering 2013-10-02 00:40:57,813 DEBUG [cloud.network.NetworkModelImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Service SecurityGroup is not supported in the network id=238 2013-10-02 00:40:57,828 DEBUG [cloud.api.ApiServlet] (catalina-exec-15:null) ===END=== -- GET command=queryAsyncJobResultjobId=183063da-fb08-425b-8057-157e33320674 response=jsonsessionkey=VEyky3f1rsQVfLVs9pGg2sXh60o%3D_=13806456467 39 2013-10-02 00:40:57,867 DEBUG [cloud.vm.UserVmManagerImpl] (catalina-exec-16:null) Allocating in the DB for vm 2013-10-02
Re: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland
Hey Ahmed, You really know the consequences of my foolish actions, welcoming me to hotel CloudStack. I may check out but I cannot leave, can I? I think I was trapped before, though. regards, On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Ahmad Emneina aemne...@gmail.com wrote: there is no exit for you now! cloudstack for life!!! Congrats Daan. On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com wrote: Congrats Daan -Original Message- From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 7:48 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: [ANNOUNCE] New PMC member: Daan Hoogland The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack has asked Daan Hoogland to join the PMC and we are pleased to announce that they have accepted. Join me in congratulating Daan! -The CloudStack PMC
[DISCUSS] Leaky abstractions [was review requests 13238, 13896, 14320]
We have a couple of people trying to expose the advanced capabilities of the underlying physical resources to the end-user. In the case of Nicolas FOATA, he is trying to expose some of the advanced functions of XenServer/XCP, and in the case of Daan, he is trying to expose some feature of HAProxy. Users are ideally abstracted from these details and shouldn't have to wonder which offering to choose [because they are not Xen/HAProxy experts]. After all one of the goals of CS is to hide these messy details and let users focus on their apps. Is there a possibility of a generic way of leaking abstractions for sufficiently advanced users? https://reviews.apache.org/r/13238/ https://reviews.apache.org/r/14320/ https://reviews.apache.org/r/13896/ BTW, I really prefer that these changes are discussed by putting up an FS on the wiki rather than submitting patch requests. If it touches more than a few files, it is probably worth discussing with a [DISCUSS] tag line. Also, it requires tests.
Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router
Got it. Any other OSS tool out there similar to monit? On 10/1/13 8:24 AM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote: On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com wrote: SNMP wouldn't restart a failed process nor would it generate alerts. It is simply too generic for the requirements outlined here. The proposal does not talk about modifying monit, just using it. That wouldn't trigger the AGPL. Let me restate my objection to anything AGPL. People are largely comfortable with GPLv2 software - Linux is ubiquitous. Many legal departments routinely prohibit GPLv3 software (we actually saw this when CS was GPLv3 licensed.) But the Affero GPL license is anathema in many corporate environments, and by forcing it on folks in the default System VM I fear it will hurt adoption of CloudStack. --David
Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router
supervisord maybe? - Original Message - From: Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Sent: Tuesday, October 1, 2013 4:45:56 PM Subject: Re: [PROPOSAL] Service monitoring tool in virtual router Got it. Any other OSS tool out there similar to monit? On 10/1/13 8:24 AM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote: On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 1:27 AM, Chiradeep Vittal chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com wrote: SNMP wouldn't restart a failed process nor would it generate alerts. It is simply too generic for the requirements outlined here. The proposal does not talk about modifying monit, just using it. That wouldn't trigger the AGPL. Let me restate my objection to anything AGPL. People are largely comfortable with GPLv2 software - Linux is ubiquitous. Many legal departments routinely prohibit GPLv3 software (we actually saw this when CS was GPLv3 licensed.) But the Affero GPL license is anathema in many corporate environments, and by forcing it on folks in the default System VM I fear it will hurt adoption of CloudStack. --David
Hypervisor Questions
Hi, I was wondering if people could clarify for me what CloudStack manages versus what the hypervisor manages in terms of live migration, high availability, and distributed resource scheduling? I know it is probably different for XenServer, VMware, and KVM. Can people fill in the info below (managed by the management server, the hypervisor, or some combination of both)? XenServer Live migration: High availability: Distributed Resource Scheduling: XenServer Live migration: High availability: Distributed Resource Scheduling: XenServer Live migration: High availability: Distributed Resource Scheduling: Thanks! -- *Mike Tutkowski* *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com o: 303.746.7302 Advancing the way the world uses the cloudhttp://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play *™*
RE: Hypervisor Questions
First, I think you meant to put XenServer, KVM, and VMware and not XenServer 3 times in a row. That being said I think in all cases (somebody correct me if I'm wrong here) it goes something like this: Live Migration: Request is made by CS but carried out by the HV. High Availability: More accurately it's recovery after host failure because it's still a disruptive action when a host goes sideways, but by default this is handled by CS. I _think_ there's an option to let the HV handle this but I'm not totally sure. DRS: Managed by CS through one of several methods with the global setting vm.allocation.algorithm (see below) 'random', 'firstfit', 'userdispersing', 'userconcentratedpod_random', 'userconcentratedpod_firstfit' : Order in which hosts within a cluster will be considered for VM/volume allocation. That being said, after deployment there isn't any further DRS monitoring; it's only done at the time an instance is instantiated. -Clayton -Original Message- From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 3:00 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Hypervisor Questions Hi, I was wondering if people could clarify for me what CloudStack manages versus what the hypervisor manages in terms of live migration, high availability, and distributed resource scheduling? I know it is probably different for XenServer, VMware, and KVM. Can people fill in the info below (managed by the management server, the hypervisor, or some combination of both)? XenServer Live migration: High availability: Distributed Resource Scheduling: XenServer Live migration: High availability: Distributed Resource Scheduling: XenServer Live migration: High availability: Distributed Resource Scheduling: Thanks! -- *Mike Tutkowski* *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com o: 303.746.7302 Advancing the way the world uses the cloudhttp://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play *(tm)*
Re: Hypervisor Questions
Thanks, Clayton! Yeah, copy/paste mistake there. :) I meant it as you said. On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Clayton Weise cwe...@keyinfo.com wrote: First, I think you meant to put XenServer, KVM, and VMware and not XenServer 3 times in a row. That being said I think in all cases (somebody correct me if I'm wrong here) it goes something like this: Live Migration: Request is made by CS but carried out by the HV. High Availability: More accurately it's recovery after host failure because it's still a disruptive action when a host goes sideways, but by default this is handled by CS. I _think_ there's an option to let the HV handle this but I'm not totally sure. DRS: Managed by CS through one of several methods with the global setting vm.allocation.algorithm (see below) 'random', 'firstfit', 'userdispersing', 'userconcentratedpod_random', 'userconcentratedpod_firstfit' : Order in which hosts within a cluster will be considered for VM/volume allocation. That being said, after deployment there isn't any further DRS monitoring; it's only done at the time an instance is instantiated. -Clayton -Original Message- From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 3:00 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Hypervisor Questions Hi, I was wondering if people could clarify for me what CloudStack manages versus what the hypervisor manages in terms of live migration, high availability, and distributed resource scheduling? I know it is probably different for XenServer, VMware, and KVM. Can people fill in the info below (managed by the management server, the hypervisor, or some combination of both)? XenServer Live migration: High availability: Distributed Resource Scheduling: XenServer Live migration: High availability: Distributed Resource Scheduling: XenServer Live migration: High availability: Distributed Resource Scheduling: Thanks! -- *Mike Tutkowski* *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com o: 303.746.7302 Advancing the way the world uses the cloudhttp://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play *(tm)* -- *Mike Tutkowski* *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com o: 303.746.7302 Advancing the way the world uses the cloudhttp://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play *™*
Re: Hypervisor Questions
Oh, and, yes, when I referred to HA, it was (as you said) with the meaning of a host going offline and VMs being restarted on other hosts (perhaps in a prioritized order if there are an insufficient number of resources to support all of the VMs that were running on the downed host). Does CS support assigning a priority to a VM in case not all VMs can be restarted on the remaining resources? On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Mike Tutkowski mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com wrote: Thanks, Clayton! Yeah, copy/paste mistake there. :) I meant it as you said. On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Clayton Weise cwe...@keyinfo.com wrote: First, I think you meant to put XenServer, KVM, and VMware and not XenServer 3 times in a row. That being said I think in all cases (somebody correct me if I'm wrong here) it goes something like this: Live Migration: Request is made by CS but carried out by the HV. High Availability: More accurately it's recovery after host failure because it's still a disruptive action when a host goes sideways, but by default this is handled by CS. I _think_ there's an option to let the HV handle this but I'm not totally sure. DRS: Managed by CS through one of several methods with the global setting vm.allocation.algorithm (see below) 'random', 'firstfit', 'userdispersing', 'userconcentratedpod_random', 'userconcentratedpod_firstfit' : Order in which hosts within a cluster will be considered for VM/volume allocation. That being said, after deployment there isn't any further DRS monitoring; it's only done at the time an instance is instantiated. -Clayton -Original Message- From: Mike Tutkowski [mailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 3:00 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Hypervisor Questions Hi, I was wondering if people could clarify for me what CloudStack manages versus what the hypervisor manages in terms of live migration, high availability, and distributed resource scheduling? I know it is probably different for XenServer, VMware, and KVM. Can people fill in the info below (managed by the management server, the hypervisor, or some combination of both)? XenServer Live migration: High availability: Distributed Resource Scheduling: XenServer Live migration: High availability: Distributed Resource Scheduling: XenServer Live migration: High availability: Distributed Resource Scheduling: Thanks! -- *Mike Tutkowski* *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com o: 303.746.7302 Advancing the way the world uses the cloudhttp://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play *(tm)* -- *Mike Tutkowski* *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com o: 303.746.7302 Advancing the way the world uses the cloudhttp://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play *™* -- *Mike Tutkowski* *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.* e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com o: 303.746.7302 Advancing the way the world uses the cloudhttp://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play *™*
Re: Unable to create instance after upgrading to CloudStack 4.2.0
Dear Animesh, Sanjay and all, Latest test that I and Abhinav done earlier this morning: - Abhinav tested upgrade from 4.1.1 to 4.2.0 on his lab and he noticed that the additional resource_count types (total 4 of them: cpu, memory, primary_storage and secondary_storage) were added automatically during DB schema upgrade. Excerpts from his management-server.log file: 2013-10-01 23:56:46,318 DEBUG [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) resource_count table has records missing for some domains...going to insert them 2013-10-01 23:56:46,339 DEBUG [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) Inserting resource count of type cpu for domain id=1 2013-10-01 23:56:46,341 DEBUG [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) Inserting resource count of type memory for domain id=1 2013-10-01 23:56:46,349 DEBUG [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) Inserting resource count of type primary_storage for domain id=1 2013-10-01 23:56:46,351 DEBUG [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) Inserting resource count of type secondary_storage for domain id=1 2013-10-01 23:56:46,362 DEBUG [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) resource_count table has records missing for some accounts...going to insert them 2013-10-01 23:56:46,372 DEBUG [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) Inserting resource count of type cpu for account id=1 2013-10-01 23:56:46,379 DEBUG [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) Inserting resource count of type memory for account id=1 2013-10-01 23:56:46,381 DEBUG [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) Inserting resource count of type primary_storage for account id=1 2013-10-01 23:56:46,388 DEBUG [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) Inserting resource count of type secondary_storage for account id=1 2013-10-01 23:56:46,418 DEBUG [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) Inserting resource count of type cpu for account id=2 2013-10-01 23:56:46,420 DEBUG [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) Inserting resource count of type memory for account id=2 2013-10-01 23:56:46,428 DEBUG [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) Inserting resource count of type primary_storage for account id=2 2013-10-01 23:56:46,429 DEBUG [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) Inserting resource count of type secondary_storage for account id=2 2013-10-01 23:56:46,439 INFO [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) Processing updateSSLKeyStore 2013-10-01 23:56:46,499 INFO [cloud.server.ConfigurationServerImpl] (Timer-2:null) SSL keystore located at /etc/cloudstack/management/cloud.keystore However, I didn't have the above during the DB schema upgrade. May I know which process triggers the above situation and leads to the additional records to be inserted? Tried to go through the /usr/share/cloudstack-management/setup/db/schema-410to420.sql script and cannot find the above. Any reason why my upgrade didn't trigger the insertion of the additional records? Urgently looking forward to your reply, thank you. Cheers. On Wed, Oct 2, 2013 at 3:43 AM, Animesh Chaturvedi animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com wrote: Copying Sanjay Animesh -Original Message- From: Indra Pramana [mailto:in...@sg.or.id] Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2013 11:06 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; us...@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: Unable to create instance after upgrading to CloudStack 4.2.0 Dear all, Further investigation reveals that there might be some issues with the schema upgrade. When we check the resource_count table for the account ID: mysql select * from resource_count where account_id=2; +++---+---+---+ | id | account_id | domain_id | type | count | +++---+---+---+ | 17 | 2 | NULL | user_vm |30 | | 18 | 2 | NULL | public_ip | 4 | | 19 | 2 | NULL | volume|40 | | 20 | 2 | NULL | snapshot | 1 | | 21 | 2 | NULL | template |40 | | 22 | 2 | NULL | project | 0 | | 23 | 2 | NULL | network | 2 | | 24 | 2 | NULL | vpc | 0 | +++---+---+---+ There's no 'primary_storage' type there. In comparison, Abhinav's database contains the details: mysql SELECT * FROM cloud.resource_count where account_id=2; +++---+---+-+ | id | account_id | domain_id | type | count | +++---+---+-+ | 17 | 2 | NULL | user_vm | 4 | | 18 | 2 | NULL | public_ip | 1 | | 19 | 2 | NULL | volume| 3 | | 20 | 2
Hi
Hi Everyone, I just wanted to take a second and introduce myself. I recently joined Citrix as the VP of Cloud Engineering, and I'm responsible for the Citrix CloudPlatofrm (powered by Apache CloudStack). I just joined the list and am looking forward to working with everyone in the community. Feel free to drop me a note if you have suggestions for me on how Citrix can best work with the Apache CloudStack community. Thanks, -Steve twitter: @virtualsteve email: steve.wil...@citrix.com
