Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Erik Weber]

I agree with Remi that it makes sense to separate packaging from the actual
product.

Erik

Den fredag 6. november 2015 skrev Remi Bergsma 
følgende:

> Hi Paul,
>
> I just tried it, see the same message but also see it actually works.
> Management server starts and I can see the UI and work from that. I don’t
> see this as a blocking issue.
>
> On a more generic note, I think we need to move the packaging scripts to
> their own repository and iterate them separately from CloudStack itself.
> The ASF doesn’t deliver the packages anyway, so we better make it more
> flexible. The packaging scripts now compile the source. We should put our
> artifacts on Maven Central and use those in the packaging instead.
>
> Any change on the packaging needs to be automatically tested (including
> installs) so we prevent ending up in this situation.
>
> If we do this, we will have cloudstack-management-4.6.0-0 packages, make a
> fix to them and we’ll have cloudstack-management-4.6.0-1, etc. Package
> managers know very well how to handle this. The problems found now, can be
> addressed separately and make a new package, as the CloudStack code itself
> doesn’t change.
>
> TL;DR CloudStack is fine, hence it has never been in such a good shape.
> @all please continue the testing.
>
>
> Regards,
> Remi
>
>
> On 06/11/15 16:00, "Paul Angus" >
> wrote:
>
> >The messages plainly say that:
> >
> >Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed]
> >
> >That is showing an error.
> >
> >It then says that it successfully rolled back.
> >
> >Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
> >Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]
> >
> >You then restart it yourself manually after forcing https
> >
> >systemctl restart cloudstack-management
> >
> >
> >IMO that is not an acceptable user experience.
> >
> >If there are missing files and incorrect links due to CentOS 7 using
> tomcat7 then they need to be added to the packaging before the issue can be
> said to be fixed.
> >This is why it was taking me so long to untangle all of the changes
> required for centos7.
> >
> >serviceConfigServer.py  (deal with tomcat6&7 + sudoers)
> >syscfg.py (system for rhel7 for *server* not included)
> >and  /packaging/centos7/cloud.spec (tomcat7 conf files need adding)
> >
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Paul Angus
> >VP Technology/Cloud Architect
> >S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447711418784 | T: CloudyAngus
> >paul.an...@shapeblue.com 
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: David Amorim da Cruz Faria [mailto:da...@amorim-cruz.net
> ]
> >Sent: 06 November 2015 14:36
> >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
> >Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> >
> >Hi Paul,
> >
> >the cloudstack-setup-management tool exits without error and the
> management server starts fine.
> >These files are currently missing from packaging/centos7/tomcat7 but are
> used by the tool.
> >
> >[root@mgmt01 ~]# cloudstack-setup-management Starting to configure
> CloudStack Management Server:
> >Configure Firewall ...[OK]
> >Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed] Cannot find
> /etc/cloudstack/management/server-nonssl.xml or
> /etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-nonssl.conf, https enables failed Try to
> restore your system:
> >Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
> >Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]
> >
> >[root@mgmt01 ~]# echo $?
> >0
> >
> >[root@mgmt01 ~]# cloudstack-setup-management --https Starting to
> configure CloudStack Management Server:
> >Configure Firewall ...[OK]
> >Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed] Cannot find
> /etc/cloudstack/management/server-ssl.xml or
> /etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-ssl.conf, https enables failed Try to
> restore your system:
> >Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
> >Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]
> >
> >[root@mgmt01 ~]# echo $?
> >0
> >
> >[root@mgmt01 ~]# systemctl restart cloudstack-management
> >
> >[root@mgmt01 ~]# systemctl status cloudstack-management -l
> cloudstack-management.service - CloudStack Management Server
> >   Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/cloudstack-management.service;
> >enabled)
> >   Active: active (running) since vr 2015-11-06 14:31:15 UTC; 11s ago
> >  Process: 4475 ExecStop=/usr/libexec/tomcat/server stop (code=exited,
> >status=0/SUCCESS)
> > Main PID: 4530 (java)
> >   CGroup: /system.slice/cloudstack-management.service
> >   └─4530 java -Djava.awt.headless=true
> -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote=false -Xmx2g -XX:+HeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError
> -XX:HeapDumpPath=/var/log/cloudstack/management/ -XX:PermSize=512M
> -XX:MaxPermSize=800m -classpath
> /etc/cloudstack/management:/usr/share/cloudstack-common:/usr/share/cloudstack-management/setup:/usr/share/java/mysql-connector-java.jar:/usr/share/cloudstack-management/bin/bootstrap.jar:/usr/share/cloudstack-management/bin/tomcat-juli.jar:/usr/share/java/commons-daemon.jar
> 

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9039: Fix paths for logging Ub...

[borisroman]

Github user borisroman commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1039#issuecomment-154343137
  
@ustcweizhou This is only for the management server! The usage server will 
create it's own paths when installed. @milamberspace I'll push that change, 
thanks!


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: Getting Full Volume Snapshots every day

[anil lakineni]

Hello guys,

Any ideas on the request? Please..

Regards,
Anil.

On Thu, Nov 5, 2015 at 6:48 PM, mvs babu  wrote:

> Hi Team,
>
>
> We have scheduled daily volume snapshots in ACS 4.3.1 and XenServer 6.2
> SP1 as Hypervisor. ​In secondary storage, we are getting full backups every
> day instead of incremental backups.
>
> After restarting management service and SQL service, we found that the
> next backup was incremental and there after remaining backups are full
> again.
>
> We have two management servers and configured Data Base HA.
>
>
> Please find DB information for one volume below,
>
> http://pastebin.com/kXc28QpM
>
> http://pastebin.com/iFMDtAZH
>
>
> Thank you,
> Suneel Mallela

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9040: Use Tomcat6 for Debian p...

[ustcweizhou]

Github user ustcweizhou commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1040#issuecomment-154340784
  
@borisroman Thanks! good to know it. Could you give more details how to 
make it work on tomcat7, so that we can discuss and look for a solution to make 
CS working on both of tomcat6 and tomcat 7 if possible?


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: debian: Updated dependencies for Packages

[wilderrodrigues]

Github user wilderrodrigues commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/783#issuecomment-154341186
  
#1040 


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9039: Fix paths for logging Ub...

[ustcweizhou]

Github user ustcweizhou commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1039#discussion_r44112930
  
--- Diff: python/lib/cloudutils/serviceConfigServer.py ---
@@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ def checkHostName():
 bash("chown cloud.cloud /var/run/cloudstack-management.pid")
 #distro like sl 6.1 needs this folder, or tomcat6 failed to start
 checkHostName()
-bash("mkdir /var/log/cloudstack-management/")
+bash("mkdir /var/log/cloudstack/")
+bash("mkdir /var/log/cloudstack/management/")
--- End diff --

I agree with @milamberspace .
btw, what about the /var/log/cloudstack/usage for usage server?



---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Wilder Rodrigues]

Hi all,

My considerations after the tests agains XenServer 6.2:

We got 4 failures whilst testing against Xen62:

* test_vpc_redundant.py on line 522
  - AssertionError: No Master or too many master routers found 0
* test_internal_lb.py lines 712 and 576, when trying to deploy a virtual machine
  - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-36-89-VM]
  - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-36-91-VM]
 * test_vpc_vpn.py line 604 for the same reason as above
  - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-37-95-VM]

There are bugs in the test_vpc_vpn.py VPN test: in case of failures, when we 
reach either line 604 or 624, it will try to assert the state of the variable 
vm1/vm2, but is has not been assigned yet, which makes us face an Unbound Error:
  - UnboundLocalError: local variable 'vm1' referenced before assignment

Looking at the code I noticed that the same will happen for vm2, in case vm1 
deployment passes but vm1 doesn’t.

Concerning the LB and VPN tests, those failed due to a wrong template. Those 
tests should be executed against KVM only as they have a configuration which 
depends on KVM hypervisors

```
"default_hypervisor": "kvm",
"compute_offering": {
"name": "Tiny Instance",
"displaytext": "Tiny Instance",
"cpunumber": 1,
"cpuspeed": 100,
"memory": 128,
}
```

But I will change that.

Concerning the redundant VPC test that failed, it was due an absence of a 
master router. For some reason, after the self.delete_nat_rules() was called, 
the router switched from Master to Backup, which caused the error. I will 
investigate.

There was also a problem reported by Boris concerning the DEB packages, which 
he already has a PR for ==> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1040. 
This is package related, thus I don’t see it as a blocker for the release, 
hence my +1.


::: Full Report :::


:: Environment 1 ::

* Hardware required: TRUE
* Management Server + MySQL on CentOS 7.1
* Two XenServer 6.2 hosts


:: Tests Suites Executed ::

nosetests --with-marvin 
--marvin-config=/data/shared/marvin/mct-zone1-xen1-ISOLATED.cfg -s -a 
tags=advanced,required_hardware=true component/test_vpc_redundant.py 
component/test_routers_iptables_default_policy.py 
component/test_routers_network_ops.py component/test_vpc_router_nics.py 
component/test_password_server.py component/test_router_dhcphosts.py 
smoke/test_loadbalance.py smoke/test_internal_lb.py smoke/test_ssvm.py 
smoke/test_vpc_vpn.py smoke/test_network.py

:: Environment 2 ::

* Hardware required: FALSE
* Management Server + MySQL on CentOS 7.1
* Two XenServer 6.2 hosts


:: Tests Suites Executed ::

nosetests --with-marvin 
--marvin-config=/data/shared/marvin/mct-zone1-xen1-ISOLATED.cfg -s -a 
tags=advanced,required_hardware=false smoke/test_routers.py 
smoke/test_reset_vm_on_reboot.py smoke/test_vm_life_cycle.py 
component/test_vpc_routers.py smoke/test_service_offerings.py 
component/test_vpc_offerings.py smoke/test_network_acl.py 
smoke/test_privategw_acl.py smoke/test_network.py


:: Summary ::

* Tests executes: 75
* Successfull tests: 72
* Skipped tests: 6(*)
* Failed tests: 5(**)

(*) Tests were skipped because I had 2 hosts and the current logic in the tests 
does not cope with that: it lists the hosts and takes the one in index zero
- host = hosts[0]
(**) Failures and Exceptions being taken into counted

:: Test results for Environment 1 ::


Create a redundant VPC with two networks with two VMs in each network ... === 
TestName: test_01_create_redundant_VPC_2tiers_4VMs_4IPs_4PF_ACL | Status : 
FAILED ===
FAIL
Create a redundant VPC with two networks with two VMs in each network and check 
default routes ... SKIP: Marvin configuration has no host credentials to
check router services
Test iptables default INPUT/FORWARD policy on RouterVM ... === TestName: 
test_02_routervm_iptables_policies | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test iptables default INPUT/FORWARD policies on VPC router ... === TestName: 
test_01_single_VPC_iptables_policies | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test redundant router internals ... === TestName: 
test_01_isolate_network_FW_PF_default_routes_egress_true | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test redundant router internals ... === TestName: 
test_02_isolate_network_FW_PF_default_routes_egress_false | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test redundant router internals ... === TestName: 
test_01_RVR_Network_FW_PF_SSH_default_routes_egress_true | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test redundant router internals ... === TestName: 
test_02_RVR_Network_FW_PF_SSH_default_routes_egress_false | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Create a VPC with two networks with one VM in each network and test nics after 
destroy ... === TestName: test_01_VPC_nics_after_destroy | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Create a VPC with two networks with one VM in each network and test default 
routes ... === TestName: test_02_VPC_default_routes | Status 

Re: [RFC] Metrics views for CloudStack UI

[Wido den Hollander]

On 11/05/2015 03:09 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> The present CloudStack UI hides most of the metrics data such as cpu, memory, 
> disk, network usage in inner detail views. Such information is critical to 
> find issues in one’s cloud, for example finding clusters where hosts are 
> failing, or finding storage pools where disk space has depleted beyond 
> configured global or cluster thresholds.
> 
> The metrics views for CloudStack UI is an attempt to solve those problems 
> that brings in several UI enhancements such as sortable tables, new status 
> icons, methods to control breadcrumb navigation, making UI’s global list* API 
> pagesize dynamic, a new table widget based on listView widget that is both 
> horizontally and vertically scrollable, supports cell/threshold coloring, 
> collapsible columns along with navigation from one view to another and 
> quick-view actions. For example, currently support navigation are: Zone to 
> Cluster to Host to Instance to Volumes, and Storage Pool to Volumes.
> 
> The current version implements six resource views for zone, cluster, host, 
> instance, volume and storage pool (primary storage). The metrics framework 
> (based on listView widget) would allow developers to write more such view 
> where information can be densely packed.
> 
> Please checkout the FS (with some screenshots) and the PR;
> 
> FS: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9020
> JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9020
> PR: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1038
> 
> Comments and suggestions?
> 

Overall it looks very good, but I personally would like to see the
amount of Instances per Zone/Host in a Quick overview, that's what
lacking currently imho.

Would that be easy to do?

Wido

> Regards,
> Rohit Yadav
> Software Architect, ShapeBlue
> 
> 
> [cid:image003.png@01D104EF.CE276C40]
> 
> 
> M. +91 88 262 30892 | 
> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab
> ShapeBlue Ltd, 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London, WC2N 4HS
> 
> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services
> 
> IaaS Cloud Design & Build
> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework
> CloudStack Consulting
> CloudStack Software 
> Engineering
> CloudStack Infrastructure 
> Support
> CloudStack Bootcamp Training 
> Courses
> 
> 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 SA Pty Ltd is a company 
> registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from 
> Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.
> 

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Wilder Rodrigues]

I forgot to mention that for the failed rVPC test I followed the same steps 
manually and it worked as expected.

In addition, I would like to hear from the community what should we do in terms 
of minor/major bugs in new features (like the rVPC). Will those be fix and 
added to a 4.6.1 or should it still be part of 4.6.0?

Cheers,
Wilder

On 06 Nov 2015, at 09:17, Wilder Rodrigues 
> wrote:

Hi all,

My considerations after the tests agains XenServer 6.2:

We got 4 failures whilst testing against Xen62:

* test_vpc_redundant.py on line 522
  - AssertionError: No Master or too many master routers found 0
* test_internal_lb.py lines 712 and 576, when trying to deploy a virtual machine
  - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-36-89-VM]
  - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-36-91-VM]
 * test_vpc_vpn.py line 604 for the same reason as above
  - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-37-95-VM]

There are bugs in the test_vpc_vpn.py VPN test: in case of failures, when we 
reach either line 604 or 624, it will try to assert the state of the variable 
vm1/vm2, but is has not been assigned yet, which makes us face an Unbound Error:
  - UnboundLocalError: local variable 'vm1' referenced before assignment

Looking at the code I noticed that the same will happen for vm2, in case vm1 
deployment passes but vm1 doesn’t.

Concerning the LB and VPN tests, those failed due to a wrong template. Those 
tests should be executed against KVM only as they have a configuration which 
depends on KVM hypervisors

```
"default_hypervisor": "kvm",
"compute_offering": {
"name": "Tiny Instance",
"displaytext": "Tiny Instance",
"cpunumber": 1,
"cpuspeed": 100,
"memory": 128,
}
```

But I will change that.

Concerning the redundant VPC test that failed, it was due an absence of a 
master router. For some reason, after the self.delete_nat_rules() was called, 
the router switched from Master to Backup, which caused the error. I will 
investigate.

There was also a problem reported by Boris concerning the DEB packages, which 
he already has a PR for ==> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1040. 
This is package related, thus I don’t see it as a blocker for the release, 
hence my +1.


::: Full Report :::


:: Environment 1 ::

* Hardware required: TRUE
* Management Server + MySQL on CentOS 7.1
* Two XenServer 6.2 hosts


:: Tests Suites Executed ::

nosetests --with-marvin 
--marvin-config=/data/shared/marvin/mct-zone1-xen1-ISOLATED.cfg -s -a 
tags=advanced,required_hardware=true component/test_vpc_redundant.py 
component/test_routers_iptables_default_policy.py 
component/test_routers_network_ops.py component/test_vpc_router_nics.py 
component/test_password_server.py component/test_router_dhcphosts.py 
smoke/test_loadbalance.py smoke/test_internal_lb.py smoke/test_ssvm.py 
smoke/test_vpc_vpn.py smoke/test_network.py

:: Environment 2 ::

* Hardware required: FALSE
* Management Server + MySQL on CentOS 7.1
* Two XenServer 6.2 hosts


:: Tests Suites Executed ::

nosetests --with-marvin 
--marvin-config=/data/shared/marvin/mct-zone1-xen1-ISOLATED.cfg -s -a 
tags=advanced,required_hardware=false smoke/test_routers.py 
smoke/test_reset_vm_on_reboot.py smoke/test_vm_life_cycle.py 
component/test_vpc_routers.py smoke/test_service_offerings.py 
component/test_vpc_offerings.py smoke/test_network_acl.py 
smoke/test_privategw_acl.py smoke/test_network.py


:: Summary ::

* Tests executes: 75
* Successfull tests: 72
* Skipped tests: 6(*)
* Failed tests: 5(**)

(*) Tests were skipped because I had 2 hosts and the current logic in the tests 
does not cope with that: it lists the hosts and takes the one in index zero
- host = hosts[0]
(**) Failures and Exceptions being taken into counted

:: Test results for Environment 1 ::


Create a redundant VPC with two networks with two VMs in each network ... === 
TestName: test_01_create_redundant_VPC_2tiers_4VMs_4IPs_4PF_ACL | Status : 
FAILED ===
FAIL
Create a redundant VPC with two networks with two VMs in each network and check 
default routes ... SKIP: Marvin configuration has no host credentials to
check router services
Test iptables default INPUT/FORWARD policy on RouterVM ... === TestName: 
test_02_routervm_iptables_policies | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test iptables default INPUT/FORWARD policies on VPC router ... === TestName: 
test_01_single_VPC_iptables_policies | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test redundant router internals ... === TestName: 
test_01_isolate_network_FW_PF_default_routes_egress_true | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test redundant router internals ... === TestName: 
test_02_isolate_network_FW_PF_default_routes_egress_false | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test redundant router internals ... === TestName: 

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Nux!]

Well, in my non-coder opinion, we should not deliver broken software, however 
we saw in the past fixing it all delayed release considerably.
Now, how broken is that VPC? :)

--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro

- Original Message -
> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 08:57:56
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

> I forgot to mention that for the failed rVPC test I followed the same steps
> manually and it worked as expected.
> 
> In addition, I would like to hear from the community what should we do in 
> terms
> of minor/major bugs in new features (like the rVPC). Will those be fix and
> added to a 4.6.1 or should it still be part of 4.6.0?
> 
> Cheers,
> Wilder
> 
> On 06 Nov 2015, at 09:17, Wilder Rodrigues
> > wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> My considerations after the tests agains XenServer 6.2:
> 
> We got 4 failures whilst testing against Xen62:
> 
> * test_vpc_redundant.py on line 522
>  - AssertionError: No Master or too many master routers found 0
> * test_internal_lb.py lines 712 and 576, when trying to deploy a virtual 
> machine
>  - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-36-89-VM]
>  - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-36-91-VM]
> * test_vpc_vpn.py line 604 for the same reason as above
>  - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-37-95-VM]
> 
> There are bugs in the test_vpc_vpn.py VPN test: in case of failures, when we
> reach either line 604 or 624, it will try to assert the state of the variable
> vm1/vm2, but is has not been assigned yet, which makes us face an Unbound
> Error:
>  - UnboundLocalError: local variable 'vm1' referenced before assignment
> 
> Looking at the code I noticed that the same will happen for vm2, in case vm1
> deployment passes but vm1 doesn’t.
> 
> Concerning the LB and VPN tests, those failed due to a wrong template. Those
> tests should be executed against KVM only as they have a configuration which
> depends on KVM hypervisors
> 
> ```
>"default_hypervisor": "kvm",
>"compute_offering": {
>"name": "Tiny Instance",
>"displaytext": "Tiny Instance",
>"cpunumber": 1,
>"cpuspeed": 100,
>"memory": 128,
>}
> ```
> 
> But I will change that.
> 
> Concerning the redundant VPC test that failed, it was due an absence of a 
> master
> router. For some reason, after the self.delete_nat_rules() was called, the
> router switched from Master to Backup, which caused the error. I will
> investigate.
> 
> There was also a problem reported by Boris concerning the DEB packages, which 
> he
> already has a PR for ==> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1040. This
> is package related, thus I don’t see it as a blocker for the release, hence my
> +1.
> 
> 
> ::: Full Report :::
> 
> 
> :: Environment 1 ::
> 
> * Hardware required: TRUE
> * Management Server + MySQL on CentOS 7.1
> * Two XenServer 6.2 hosts
> 
> 
> :: Tests Suites Executed ::
> 
> nosetests --with-marvin
> --marvin-config=/data/shared/marvin/mct-zone1-xen1-ISOLATED.cfg -s -a
> tags=advanced,required_hardware=true component/test_vpc_redundant.py
> component/test_routers_iptables_default_policy.py
> component/test_routers_network_ops.py component/test_vpc_router_nics.py
> component/test_password_server.py component/test_router_dhcphosts.py
> smoke/test_loadbalance.py smoke/test_internal_lb.py smoke/test_ssvm.py
> smoke/test_vpc_vpn.py smoke/test_network.py
> 
> :: Environment 2 ::
> 
> * Hardware required: FALSE
> * Management Server + MySQL on CentOS 7.1
> * Two XenServer 6.2 hosts
> 
> 
> :: Tests Suites Executed ::
> 
> nosetests --with-marvin
> --marvin-config=/data/shared/marvin/mct-zone1-xen1-ISOLATED.cfg -s -a
> tags=advanced,required_hardware=false smoke/test_routers.py
> smoke/test_reset_vm_on_reboot.py smoke/test_vm_life_cycle.py
> component/test_vpc_routers.py smoke/test_service_offerings.py
> component/test_vpc_offerings.py smoke/test_network_acl.py
> smoke/test_privategw_acl.py smoke/test_network.py
> 
> 
> :: Summary ::
> 
> * Tests executes: 75
> * Successfull tests: 72
> * Skipped tests: 6(*)
> * Failed tests: 5(**)
> 
> (*) Tests were skipped because I had 2 hosts and the current logic in the 
> tests
> does not cope with that: it lists the hosts and takes the one in index zero
>- host = hosts[0]
> (**) Failures and Exceptions being taken into counted
> 
> :: Test results for Environment 1 ::
> 
> 
> Create a redundant VPC with two networks with two VMs in each network ... ===
> TestName: test_01_create_redundant_VPC_2tiers_4VMs_4IPs_4PF_ACL | Status :
> FAILED ===
> FAIL
> Create a redundant VPC with two networks with two VMs in each network and 
> check
> default routes ... SKIP: Marvin configuration has no host credentials to
> check router services
> Test 

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Wilder Rodrigues]

Thanks for the clear message, Lucian. I really appreciated that. :)

It’s about the Redundant VPC, not the single one - which is working pretty 
fine, btw!

Open issues are:

* https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9015
* https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9035

And I have to write tests to cover Private Gateway and S2S VPN for Redundant 
VPC.

All the rest working fine, as you have seen in my report.

Cheers,
Wilder


On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:19, Nux! > wrote:

Well, in my non-coder opinion, we should not deliver broken software, however 
we saw in the past fixing it all delayed release considerably.
Now, how broken is that VPC? :)

--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro

- Original Message -
From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 08:57:56
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

I forgot to mention that for the failed rVPC test I followed the same steps
manually and it worked as expected.

In addition, I would like to hear from the community what should we do in terms
of minor/major bugs in new features (like the rVPC). Will those be fix and
added to a 4.6.1 or should it still be part of 4.6.0?

Cheers,
Wilder

On 06 Nov 2015, at 09:17, Wilder Rodrigues
> wrote:

Hi all,

My considerations after the tests agains XenServer 6.2:

We got 4 failures whilst testing against Xen62:

* test_vpc_redundant.py on line 522
- AssertionError: No Master or too many master routers found 0
* test_internal_lb.py lines 712 and 576, when trying to deploy a virtual machine
- Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-36-89-VM]
- Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-36-91-VM]
* test_vpc_vpn.py line 604 for the same reason as above
- Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-37-95-VM]

There are bugs in the test_vpc_vpn.py VPN test: in case of failures, when we
reach either line 604 or 624, it will try to assert the state of the variable
vm1/vm2, but is has not been assigned yet, which makes us face an Unbound
Error:
- UnboundLocalError: local variable 'vm1' referenced before assignment

Looking at the code I noticed that the same will happen for vm2, in case vm1
deployment passes but vm1 doesn’t.

Concerning the LB and VPN tests, those failed due to a wrong template. Those
tests should be executed against KVM only as they have a configuration which
depends on KVM hypervisors

```
  "default_hypervisor": "kvm",
  "compute_offering": {
  "name": "Tiny Instance",
  "displaytext": "Tiny Instance",
  "cpunumber": 1,
  "cpuspeed": 100,
  "memory": 128,
  }
```

But I will change that.

Concerning the redundant VPC test that failed, it was due an absence of a master
router. For some reason, after the self.delete_nat_rules() was called, the
router switched from Master to Backup, which caused the error. I will
investigate.

There was also a problem reported by Boris concerning the DEB packages, which he
already has a PR for ==> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1040. This
is package related, thus I don’t see it as a blocker for the release, hence my
+1.


::: Full Report :::


:: Environment 1 ::

* Hardware required: TRUE
* Management Server + MySQL on CentOS 7.1
* Two XenServer 6.2 hosts


:: Tests Suites Executed ::

nosetests --with-marvin
--marvin-config=/data/shared/marvin/mct-zone1-xen1-ISOLATED.cfg -s -a
tags=advanced,required_hardware=true component/test_vpc_redundant.py
component/test_routers_iptables_default_policy.py
component/test_routers_network_ops.py component/test_vpc_router_nics.py
component/test_password_server.py component/test_router_dhcphosts.py
smoke/test_loadbalance.py smoke/test_internal_lb.py smoke/test_ssvm.py
smoke/test_vpc_vpn.py smoke/test_network.py

:: Environment 2 ::

* Hardware required: FALSE
* Management Server + MySQL on CentOS 7.1
* Two XenServer 6.2 hosts


:: Tests Suites Executed ::

nosetests --with-marvin
--marvin-config=/data/shared/marvin/mct-zone1-xen1-ISOLATED.cfg -s -a
tags=advanced,required_hardware=false smoke/test_routers.py
smoke/test_reset_vm_on_reboot.py smoke/test_vm_life_cycle.py
component/test_vpc_routers.py smoke/test_service_offerings.py
component/test_vpc_offerings.py smoke/test_network_acl.py
smoke/test_privategw_acl.py smoke/test_network.py


:: Summary ::

* Tests executes: 75
* Successfull tests: 72
* Skipped tests: 6(*)
* Failed tests: 5(**)

(*) Tests were skipped because I had 2 hosts and the current logic in the tests
does not cope with that: it lists the hosts and takes the one in index zero
  - host = hosts[0]
(**) Failures and Exceptions being taken into counted

:: Test results for Environment 1 ::


Create a redundant VPC with two networks with two VMs in each network ... ===
TestName: 

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-8832 : Update Nuage VSP plugin...

[ustcweizhou]

Github user ustcweizhou commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/801#issuecomment-154363971
  
@mlsorensen I agree with that third-parties can ship their own packages 
based on official release. It is more flexible for them. They can release new 
packages with new feature/improvement and bug fix, no need to wait for official 
cloudstack release.
I also understand their concern that the code difference between their 
branch and master branch will become more and more bigger if they cannot merge 
most of their codes to main branch. It will be difficult to upgrade to new 
cloudstack versio. The upgrade means a lot of work, especially if there is 
framework refactoring. I believe many companies have their cloudstack branch 
with new features and customized UI , and they face the issue when they want 
new features and upgrade to new version.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9039: Fix paths for logging Ub...

[ustcweizhou]

Github user ustcweizhou commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1039#discussion_r44116130
  
--- Diff: python/lib/cloudutils/serviceConfigServer.py ---
@@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ def checkHostName():
 bash("chown cloud.cloud /var/run/cloudstack-management.pid")
 #distro like sl 6.1 needs this folder, or tomcat6 failed to start
 checkHostName()
-bash("mkdir /var/log/cloudstack-management/")
+bash("mkdir -p /var/log/cloudstack/")
+bash("mkdir -p /var/log/cloudstack/management/")
--- End diff --

you could remove line 110


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9039: Fix paths for logging Ub...

[ustcweizhou]

Github user ustcweizhou commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1039#issuecomment-154350435
  
@borisroman LGTM if remove line 110.




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9041: Modifying template creat...

[pritisarap12]

GitHub user pritisarap12 opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1041

CLOUDSTACK-9041: Modifying template creation from snapshot function 

In create_from_snapshot function of Template class there is no parameter to 
accept if the template is public hence default it is creating private templates 
Hence adding this parameter.

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/pritisarap12/cloudstack 
CLOUDSTACK-9041-Modifying-template-creation-from-snapshot-function-in-base.py

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1041.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1041


commit bbe0fc4be9527d51820b067a602886003991db4d
Author: Priti Sarap 
Date:   2015-11-06T09:06:32Z

CLOUDSTACK-9041: Modifying template creation from snapshot function in 
base.py




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Nux!]

Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:

9015 - it sounds somewhat serious, I'll try to test these days what happens if 
one of the VRs crashes, that's when we'd need redundancy in a more "real" 
scenario, if we could get this fixed before release it'd be ideal, Remi should 
know more re correct procedure here

9035 - sounds like a non-issue to me, if I want to reset the password  and the 
backup router does what it's told, then I don't care it doesn't have the old 
passwords from the other router cached. This could impact instance deployments 
or passwd resets right in the time BACKUP becomes MASTER. How long is this 
generally?

Lucian

--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro

- Original Message -
> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 09:29:56
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

> Thanks for the clear message, Lucian. I really appreciated that. :)
> 
> It’s about the Redundant VPC, not the single one - which is working pretty 
> fine,
> btw!
> 
> Open issues are:
> 
> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9015
> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9035
> 
> And I have to write tests to cover Private Gateway and S2S VPN for Redundant
> VPC.
> 
> All the rest working fine, as you have seen in my report.
> 
> Cheers,
> Wilder
> 
> 
> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:19, Nux! > wrote:
> 
> Well, in my non-coder opinion, we should not deliver broken software, however 
> we
> saw in the past fixing it all delayed release considerably.
> Now, how broken is that VPC? :)
> 
> --
> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> 
> Nux!
> www.nux.ro
> 
> - Original Message -
> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 08:57:56
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> 
> I forgot to mention that for the failed rVPC test I followed the same steps
> manually and it worked as expected.
> 
> In addition, I would like to hear from the community what should we do in 
> terms
> of minor/major bugs in new features (like the rVPC). Will those be fix and
> added to a 4.6.1 or should it still be part of 4.6.0?
> 
> Cheers,
> Wilder
> 
> On 06 Nov 2015, at 09:17, Wilder Rodrigues
> > wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> My considerations after the tests agains XenServer 6.2:
> 
> We got 4 failures whilst testing against Xen62:
> 
> * test_vpc_redundant.py on line 522
> - AssertionError: No Master or too many master routers found 0
> * test_internal_lb.py lines 712 and 576, when trying to deploy a virtual 
> machine
> - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-36-89-VM]
> - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-36-91-VM]
> * test_vpc_vpn.py line 604 for the same reason as above
> - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-37-95-VM]
> 
> There are bugs in the test_vpc_vpn.py VPN test: in case of failures, when we
> reach either line 604 or 624, it will try to assert the state of the variable
> vm1/vm2, but is has not been assigned yet, which makes us face an Unbound
> Error:
> - UnboundLocalError: local variable 'vm1' referenced before assignment
> 
> Looking at the code I noticed that the same will happen for vm2, in case vm1
> deployment passes but vm1 doesn’t.
> 
> Concerning the LB and VPN tests, those failed due to a wrong template. Those
> tests should be executed against KVM only as they have a configuration which
> depends on KVM hypervisors
> 
> ```
>  "default_hypervisor": "kvm",
>  "compute_offering": {
>  "name": "Tiny Instance",
>  "displaytext": "Tiny Instance",
>  "cpunumber": 1,
>  "cpuspeed": 100,
>  "memory": 128,
>  }
> ```
> 
> But I will change that.
> 
> Concerning the redundant VPC test that failed, it was due an absence of a 
> master
> router. For some reason, after the self.delete_nat_rules() was called, the
> router switched from Master to Backup, which caused the error. I will
> investigate.
> 
> There was also a problem reported by Boris concerning the DEB packages, which 
> he
> already has a PR for ==> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1040. This
> is package related, thus I don’t see it as a blocker for the release, hence my
> +1.
> 
> 
> ::: Full Report :::
> 
> 
> :: Environment 1 ::
> 
> * Hardware required: TRUE
> * Management Server + MySQL on CentOS 7.1
> * Two XenServer 6.2 hosts
> 
> 
> :: Tests Suites Executed ::
> 
> nosetests --with-marvin
> --marvin-config=/data/shared/marvin/mct-zone1-xen1-ISOLATED.cfg -s -a
> tags=advanced,required_hardware=true component/test_vpc_redundant.py
> component/test_routers_iptables_default_policy.py
> component/test_routers_network_ops.py component/test_vpc_router_nics.py
> 

Re: [RFC] Metrics views for CloudStack UI

[Stephan Seitz]

This looks really great!
You've added the metrics view at the Infrastructure tab. This is nice
for the platform ops.
I assume the very same metrics would also be a benefit for domain-admins
(say: customers). I'ld suggest to add this view somewhere below the
Instances tab.

cheers,

- Stephan


Am Donnerstag, den 05.11.2015, 14:09 + schrieb Rohit Yadav: 
> Hi all,
> 
> 
> The present CloudStack UI hides most of the metrics data such as cpu,
> memory, disk, network usage in inner detail views. Such information is
> critical to find issues in one’s cloud, for example finding clusters
> where hosts are failing, or finding storage pools where disk space has
> depleted beyond configured global or cluster thresholds.
> 
> 
> The metrics views for CloudStack UI is an attempt to solve those
> problems that brings in several UI enhancements such as sortable
> tables, new status icons, methods to control breadcrumb navigation,
> making UI’s global list* API pagesize dynamic, a new table widget
> based on listView widget that is both horizontally and vertically
> scrollable, supports cell/threshold coloring, collapsible columns
> along with navigation from one view to another and quick-view actions.
> For example, currently support navigation are: Zone to Cluster to Host
> to Instance to Volumes, and Storage Pool to Volumes. 
> 
> 
> The current version implements six resource views for zone, cluster,
> host, instance, volume and storage pool (primary storage). The metrics
> framework (based on listView widget) would allow developers to write
> more such view where information can be densely packed.
> 
> 
> Please checkout the FS (with some screenshots) and the PR;
> 
> 
> FS: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9020
> JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9020
> PR: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1038
> 
> 
> Comments and suggestions?
> 
> Regards,
> Rohit Yadav
> Software Architect, ShapeBlue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab
> ShapeBlue Ltd, 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London, WC2N 4HS
> 
> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related
> services
> 
> IaaS Cloud Design & Build
> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework
> CloudStack Consulting
> CloudStack Software Engineering
> CloudStack Infrastructure Support
> CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses
> 
> 
> 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 SA
> Pty Ltd is a company registered by The Republic of South Africa and is
> traded under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered
> trademark.

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Wilder Rodrigues]

Thanks again, Lucian!

I’m already working on 9015 and testing few things, hope to get it fixed soon, 
but not for 4.6.0.

If we kan keep the good work in terms of writing/executing tests - which will 
help keeping Master stable - and also avoid merges that don’t follow the 
rule(*), we can have a 4.6.1/4.7.0 (new features) within two month from now.

So, let us all keep the great work concerning tests/quality/stability.

Cheers,
Wilder

* 2 LGTMs + tests (written/executed)


> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:49, Nux!  wrote:
> 
> Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:
> 
> 9015 - it sounds somewhat serious, I'll try to test these days what happens 
> if one of the VRs crashes, that's when we'd need redundancy in a more "real" 
> scenario, if we could get this fixed before release it'd be ideal, Remi 
> should know more re correct procedure here
> 
> 9035 - sounds like a non-issue to me, if I want to reset the password  and 
> the backup router does what it's told, then I don't care it doesn't have the 
> old passwords from the other router cached. This could impact instance 
> deployments or passwd resets right in the time BACKUP becomes MASTER. How 
> long is this generally?
> 
> Lucian
> 
> --
> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> 
> Nux!
> www.nux.ro
> 
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 09:29:56
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> 
>> Thanks for the clear message, Lucian. I really appreciated that. :)
>> 
>> It’s about the Redundant VPC, not the single one - which is working pretty 
>> fine,
>> btw!
>> 
>> Open issues are:
>> 
>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9015
>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9035
>> 
>> And I have to write tests to cover Private Gateway and S2S VPN for Redundant
>> VPC.
>> 
>> All the rest working fine, as you have seen in my report.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Wilder
>> 
>> 
>> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:19, Nux! > wrote:
>> 
>> Well, in my non-coder opinion, we should not deliver broken software, 
>> however we
>> saw in the past fixing it all delayed release considerably.
>> Now, how broken is that VPC? :)
>> 
>> --
>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>> 
>> Nux!
>> www.nux.ro
>> 
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 08:57:56
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>> 
>> I forgot to mention that for the failed rVPC test I followed the same steps
>> manually and it worked as expected.
>> 
>> In addition, I would like to hear from the community what should we do in 
>> terms
>> of minor/major bugs in new features (like the rVPC). Will those be fix and
>> added to a 4.6.1 or should it still be part of 4.6.0?
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Wilder
>> 
>> On 06 Nov 2015, at 09:17, Wilder Rodrigues
>> > wrote:
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> My considerations after the tests agains XenServer 6.2:
>> 
>> We got 4 failures whilst testing against Xen62:
>> 
>> * test_vpc_redundant.py on line 522
>> - AssertionError: No Master or too many master routers found 0
>> * test_internal_lb.py lines 712 and 576, when trying to deploy a virtual 
>> machine
>> - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-36-89-VM]
>> - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-36-91-VM]
>> * test_vpc_vpn.py line 604 for the same reason as above
>> - Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-37-95-VM]
>> 
>> There are bugs in the test_vpc_vpn.py VPN test: in case of failures, when we
>> reach either line 604 or 624, it will try to assert the state of the variable
>> vm1/vm2, but is has not been assigned yet, which makes us face an Unbound
>> Error:
>> - UnboundLocalError: local variable 'vm1' referenced before assignment
>> 
>> Looking at the code I noticed that the same will happen for vm2, in case vm1
>> deployment passes but vm1 doesn’t.
>> 
>> Concerning the LB and VPN tests, those failed due to a wrong template. Those
>> tests should be executed against KVM only as they have a configuration which
>> depends on KVM hypervisors
>> 
>> ```
>> "default_hypervisor": "kvm",
>> "compute_offering": {
>> "name": "Tiny Instance",
>> "displaytext": "Tiny Instance",
>> "cpunumber": 1,
>> "cpuspeed": 100,
>> "memory": 128,
>> }
>> ```
>> 
>> But I will change that.
>> 
>> Concerning the redundant VPC test that failed, it was due an absence of a 
>> master
>> router. For some reason, after the self.delete_nat_rules() was called, the
>> router switched from Master to Backup, which caused the error. I will
>> investigate.
>> 
>> There was also a problem reported by Boris concerning the DEB packages, 

RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Raja Pullela]

Here is the BVT report on the RC -

[cid:image001.png@01D118B0.21037340]



Failed test cases:
· 
integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcRemoteAccessVpn.test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
 //failed due to VM deployment
· 
integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcSite2SiteVpn.test_vpc_site2site_vpn 
//failed due to VM deployment
· 
integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces
 //failed due to VM deployment
· 
integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80
 //failed due to VM deployment
· 
integration.smoke.test_over_provisioning.TestUpdateOverProvision.test_UpdateStorageOverProvisioningFactor
 //test case issue
· 
integration.smoke.test_vm_snapshots.TestSnapshots.test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot
 //test case issue
· integration.smoke.test_iso.TestISO.test_07_list_default_iso //test 
case issue
:setup  //test case issue



-Original Message-
From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com]
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:19 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0



Thanks again, Lucian!



I’m already working on 9015 and testing few things, hope to get it fixed soon, 
but not for 4.6.0.



If we kan keep the good work in terms of writing/executing tests - which will 
help keeping Master stable - and also avoid merges that don’t follow the 
rule(*), we can have a 4.6.1/4.7.0 (new features) within two month from now.



So, let us all keep the great work concerning tests/quality/stability.



Cheers,

Wilder



* 2 LGTMs + tests (written/executed)





> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:49, Nux! > wrote:

>

> Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:

>

> 9015 - it sounds somewhat serious, I'll try to test these days what

> happens if one of the VRs crashes, that's when we'd need redundancy in

> a more "real" scenario, if we could get this fixed before release it'd

> be ideal, Remi should know more re correct procedure here

>

> 9035 - sounds like a non-issue to me, if I want to reset the password  and 
> the backup router does what it's told, then I don't care it doesn't have the 
> old passwords from the other router cached. This could impact instance 
> deployments or passwd resets right in the time BACKUP becomes MASTER. How 
> long is this generally?

>

> Lucian

>

> --

> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

>

> Nux!

> www.nux.ro

>

> - Original Message -

>> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
>> >

>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org

>> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 09:29:56

>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

>

>> Thanks for the clear message, Lucian. I really appreciated that. :)

>>

>> It’s about the Redundant VPC, not the single one - which is working

>> pretty fine, btw!

>>

>> Open issues are:

>>

>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9015

>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9035

>>

>> And I have to write tests to cover Private Gateway and S2S VPN for

>> Redundant VPC.

>>

>> All the rest working fine, as you have seen in my report.

>>

>> Cheers,

>> Wilder

>>

>>

>> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:19, Nux! 
>> >>
>>  wrote:

>>

>> Well, in my non-coder opinion, we should not deliver broken software,

>> however we saw in the past fixing it all delayed release considerably.

>> Now, how broken is that VPC? :)

>>

>> --

>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

>>

>> Nux!

>> www.nux.ro>

>>

>> - Original Message -

>> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
>> >

>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org

>> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 08:57:56

>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

>>

>> I forgot to mention that for the failed rVPC test I followed the same

>> steps manually and it worked as expected.

>>

>> In addition, I would like to hear from the community what should we

>> do in terms of minor/major bugs in new features (like the rVPC). Will

>> those be fix and added to a 4.6.1 or should it still be part of 4.6.0?

>>

>> Cheers,

>> Wilder

>>

>> On 06 Nov 2015, at 09:17, Wilder Rodrigues

>> >>
>>  wrote:

>>

>> Hi all,

>>

>> My considerations after the tests agains XenServer 6.2:

>>

>> We got 4 failures whilst testing against Xen62:

>>

>> * test_vpc_redundant.py on line 522

>> - AssertionError: No Master or too many master routers found 0

>> * 

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Sebastien Goasguen]

Thanks Raja,

Attachments get striped on this mailing list, so I can’t see wha you seem to 
have attached.

Also it would be most helpful if you could comment on the errors that you 
report.
Do you consider them as blockers, are they related to open issues, shall we 
discard them ?



> On Nov 6, 2015, at 12:00 PM, Raja Pullela  wrote:
> 
> Here is the BVT report on the RC - 
> 
>  
> Failed test cases:
> · 
> integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcRemoteAccessVpn.test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
>  //failed due to VM deployment
> · 
> integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcSite2SiteVpn.test_vpc_site2site_vpn 
> //failed due to VM deployment
> · 
> integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces
>  //failed due to VM deployment
> · 
> integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80//failed
>  due to VM deployment
> ·
> integration.smoke.test_over_provisioning.TestUpdateOverProvision.test_UpdateStorageOverProvisioningFactor
>  //test case issue
> · 
> integration.smoke.test_vm_snapshots.TestSnapshots.test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot
>  //test case issue
> · integration.smoke.test_iso.TestISO.test_07_list_default_iso //test 
> case issue
> :setup  //test case issue
>  
> -Original Message-
> From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com] 
> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:19 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>  
> Thanks again, Lucian!
>  
> I’m already working on 9015 and testing few things, hope to get it fixed 
> soon, but not for 4.6.0.
>  
> If we kan keep the good work in terms of writing/executing tests - which will 
> help keeping Master stable - and also avoid merges that don’t follow the 
> rule(*), we can have a 4.6.1/4.7.0 (new features) within two month from now.
>  
> So, let us all keep the great work concerning tests/quality/stability.
>  
> Cheers,
> Wilder
>  
> * 2 LGTMs + tests (written/executed)
>  
>  
> > On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:49, Nux!  wrote:
> > 
> > Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:
> > 
> > 9015 - it sounds somewhat serious, I'll try to test these days what
> > happens if one of the VRs crashes, that's when we'd need redundancy in
> > a more "real" scenario, if we could get this fixed before release it'd
> > be ideal, Remi should know more re correct procedure here
> > 
> > 9035 - sounds like a non-issue to me, if I want to reset the password  and 
> > the backup router does what it's told, then I don't care it doesn't have 
> > the old passwords from the other router cached. This could impact instance 
> > deployments or passwd resets right in the time BACKUP becomes MASTER. How 
> > long is this generally?
> > 
> > Lucian
> > 
> > --
> > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> > 
> > Nux!
> > www.nux.ro
> > 
> > - Original Message -
> >> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
> >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 09:29:56
> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> > 
> >> Thanks for the clear message, Lucian. I really appreciated that. :)
> >> 
> >> It’s about the Redundant VPC, not the single one - which is working
> >> pretty fine, btw!
> >> 
> >> Open issues are:
> >> 
> >> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9015
> >> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9035
> >> 
> >> And I have to write tests to cover Private Gateway and S2S VPN for
> >> Redundant VPC.
> >> 
> >> All the rest working fine, as you have seen in my report.
> >> 
> >> Cheers,
> >> Wilder
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:19, Nux! > 
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Well, in my non-coder opinion, we should not deliver broken software,
> >> however we saw in the past fixing it all delayed release considerably.
> >> Now, how broken is that VPC? :)
> >> 
> >> --
> >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >> 
> >> Nux!
> >> www.nux.ro
> >> 
> >> - Original Message -
> >> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
> >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 08:57:56
> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> >> 
> >> I forgot to mention that for the failed rVPC test I followed the same
> >> steps manually and it worked as expected.
> >> 
> >> In addition, I would like to hear from the community what should we
> >> do in terms of minor/major bugs in new features (like the rVPC). Will
> >> those be fix and added to a 4.6.1 or should it still be part of 4.6.0?
> >> 
> >> Cheers,
> >> Wilder
> >> 
> >> On 06 Nov 2015, at 09:17, Wilder Rodrigues 
> >> > 
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Hi all,
> >> 
> >> My considerations after the tests agains XenServer 6.2:
> 

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Wilder Rodrigues]

Hi Raja,

Concerning the LB + VPN tests, I also faced issues when ran them against 
XenServer 6.2. The tests is trying to deploy QCOW image based VMs on the 
XenHost (see my report, please).
So, did you run the BVT agains Xen or KVM? Because the LB + VPN worked fine on 
KVM with CentOS 7.1

Thanks for the report, by the way.

Cheers,
Wilder

On 06 Nov 2015, at 12:00, Raja Pullela 
> wrote:

Here is the BVT report on the RC -

Failed test cases:
• 
integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcRemoteAccessVpn.test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
 //failed due to VM deployment
• 
integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcSite2SiteVpn.test_vpc_site2site_vpn 
//failed due to VM deployment
• 
integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces
 //failed due to VM deployment
• 
integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80
 //failed due to VM deployment
• 
integration.smoke.test_over_provisioning.TestUpdateOverProvision.test_UpdateStorageOverProvisioningFactor
 //test case issue
• 
integration.smoke.test_vm_snapshots.TestSnapshots.test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot
 //test case issue
• integration.smoke.test_iso.TestISO.test_07_list_default_iso //test 
case issue
:setup  //test case issue

-Original Message-
From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com]
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:19 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

Thanks again, Lucian!

I’m already working on 9015 and testing few things, hope to get it fixed soon, 
but not for 4.6.0.

If we kan keep the good work in terms of writing/executing tests - which will 
help keeping Master stable - and also avoid merges that don’t follow the 
rule(*), we can have a 4.6.1/4.7.0 (new features) within two month from now.

So, let us all keep the great work concerning tests/quality/stability.

Cheers,
Wilder

* 2 LGTMs + tests (written/executed)


> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:49, Nux! > wrote:
>
> Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:
>
> 9015 - it sounds somewhat serious, I'll try to test these days what
> happens if one of the VRs crashes, that's when we'd need redundancy in
> a more "real" scenario, if we could get this fixed before release it'd
> be ideal, Remi should know more re correct procedure here
>
> 9035 - sounds like a non-issue to me, if I want to reset the password  and 
> the backup router does what it's told, then I don't care it doesn't have the 
> old passwords from the other router cached. This could impact instance 
> deployments or passwd resets right in the time BACKUP becomes MASTER. How 
> long is this generally?
>
> Lucian
>
> --
> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>
> Nux!
> www.nux.ro
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
>> >
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 09:29:56
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>
>> Thanks for the clear message, Lucian. I really appreciated that. :)
>>
>> It’s about the Redundant VPC, not the single one - which is working
>> pretty fine, btw!
>>
>> Open issues are:
>>
>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9015
>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9035
>>
>> And I have to write tests to cover Private Gateway and S2S VPN for
>> Redundant VPC.
>>
>> All the rest working fine, as you have seen in my report.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Wilder
>>
>>
>> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:19, Nux! 
>> >>
>>  wrote:
>>
>> Well, in my non-coder opinion, we should not deliver broken software,
>> however we saw in the past fixing it all delayed release considerably.
>> Now, how broken is that VPC? :)
>>
>> --
>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>>
>> Nux!
>> www.nux.ro>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
>> >
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 08:57:56
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>>
>> I forgot to mention that for the failed rVPC test I followed the same
>> steps manually and it worked as expected.
>>
>> In addition, I would like to hear from the community what should we
>> do in terms of minor/major bugs in new features (like the rVPC). Will
>> those be fix and added to a 4.6.1 or should it still be part of 4.6.0?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Wilder
>>
>> On 06 Nov 2015, at 09:17, Wilder Rodrigues
>> 

RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Raja Pullela]

Here is the BVT report on the RC
KVM Basic – 98.6% , one test failed//test case issue
KVM Adv – 96.3%, four tests failed //couple due to VM deployment and couple due 
to test case issue
XS Basic – 97.2%, two tests failed//test case issues
XS Adv – 93.5%, seven tests failed //4 due to VM deployment and 3 due to test 
case issues
HyperV – 93.3%, seven tests failed
Simulator – need to run them… will report later today/tomorrow.


Failed test cases:
· 
integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcRemoteAccessVpn.test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
 //failed due to VM deployment
· 
integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcSite2SiteVpn.test_vpc_site2site_vpn 
//failed due to VM deployment
· 
integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces
 //failed due to VM deployment
· 
integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80
 //failed due to VM deployment
· 
integration.smoke.test_over_provisioning.TestUpdateOverProvision.test_UpdateStorageOverProvisioningFactor
 //test case issue
· 
integration.smoke.test_vm_snapshots.TestSnapshots.test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot
 //test case issue
· integration.smoke.test_iso.TestISO.test_07_list_default_iso //test 
case issue
:setup  //test case issue

From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pull...@citrix.com]
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:30 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0


Here is the BVT report on the RC -

[cid:image001.png@01D118B0.21037340]





-Original Message-
From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com]
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:19 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0



Thanks again, Lucian!



I’m already working on 9015 and testing few things, hope to get it fixed soon, 
but not for 4.6.0.



If we kan keep the good work in terms of writing/executing tests - which will 
help keeping Master stable - and also avoid merges that don’t follow the 
rule(*), we can have a 4.6.1/4.7.0 (new features) within two month from now.



So, let us all keep the great work concerning tests/quality/stability.



Cheers,

Wilder



* 2 LGTMs + tests (written/executed)





> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:49, Nux! > wrote:

>

> Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:

>

> 9015 - it sounds somewhat serious, I'll try to test these days what

> happens if one of the VRs crashes, that's when we'd need redundancy in

> a more "real" scenario, if we could get this fixed before release it'd

> be ideal, Remi should know more re correct procedure here

>

> 9035 - sounds like a non-issue to me, if I want to reset the password  and 
> the backup router does what it's told, then I don't care it doesn't have the 
> old passwords from the other router cached. This could impact instance 
> deployments or passwd resets right in the time BACKUP becomes MASTER. How 
> long is this generally?

>

> Lucian

>

> --

> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

>

> Nux!

> www.nux.ro

>

> - Original Message -

>> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
>> >

>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org

>> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 09:29:56

>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

>

>> Thanks for the clear message, Lucian. I really appreciated that. :)

>>

>> It’s about the Redundant VPC, not the single one - which is working

>> pretty fine, btw!

>>

>> Open issues are:

>>

>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9015

>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9035

>>

>> And I have to write tests to cover Private Gateway and S2S VPN for

>> Redundant VPC.

>>

>> All the rest working fine, as you have seen in my report.

>>

>> Cheers,

>> Wilder

>>

>>

>> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:19, Nux! 
>> >>
>>  wrote:

>>

>> Well, in my non-coder opinion, we should not deliver broken software,

>> however we saw in the past fixing it all delayed release considerably.

>> Now, how broken is that VPC? :)

>>

>> --

>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

>>

>> Nux!

>> www.nux.ro>

>>

>> - Original Message -

>> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
>> >

>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org

>> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 08:57:56

>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

>>

>> I forgot to mention that for the failed rVPC test I followed the same

>> steps manually and it worked as expected.

>>

>> In addition, I would like to hear from the community what should we

>> do in 

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-8832 : Update Nuage VSP plugin...

[remibergsma]

Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/801#issuecomment-154401989
  
Great! This one is on my list to be merged once 4.6.0 is out and we start 
building 4.7.0.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Metrics views for CloudStack UI

[DaanHoogland]

Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1038#issuecomment-154383035
  
@bhaisaab the sprites seem not to have changed. Should the sprite.png be in 
this change?


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Metrics views for CloudStack UI

[bhaisaab]

Github user bhaisaab commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1038#issuecomment-154396519
  
@DaanHoogland yes, the metrics view brings in new state icons that can be 
used in other places;
orange for alert, migrate etc. yellow for allocated, in transition etc. See 
metrics.js for state string to icon translations.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: findbugs: ! equals instead of !=

[remibergsma]

Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1019#issuecomment-154403803
  
Did run the tests before, forgot to post them. 

LGTM, based on a set of tests that I run on this branch (which I rebased 
myself first):

```
nosetests --with-marvin --marvin-config=${marvinCfg} -s -a 
tags=advanced,required_hardware=true \
component/test_vpc_redundant.py \
component/test_routers_iptables_default_policy.py \
component/test_routers_network_ops.py \
component/test_vpc_router_nics.py \
smoke/test_loadbalance.py \
smoke/test_internal_lb.py \
smoke/test_ssvm.py \
smoke/test_network.py

```

Result:

```
Create a redundant VPC with two networks with two VMs in each network ... 
=== TestName: test_01_create_redundant_VPC_2tiers_4VMs_4IPs_4PF_ACL | Status : 
SUCCESS ===
ok
Create a redundant VPC with two networks with two VMs in each network and 
check default routes ... === TestName: test_02_redundant_VPC_default_routes | 
Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test iptables default INPUT/FORWARD policy on RouterVM ... === TestName: 
test_02_routervm_iptables_policies | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test iptables default INPUT/FORWARD policies on VPC router ... === 
TestName: test_01_single_VPC_iptables_policies | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Stop existing router, add a PF rule and check we can access the VM ... === 
TestName: test_isolate_network_FW_PF_default_routes | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test redundant router internals ... === TestName: 
test_RVR_Network_FW_PF_SSH_default_routes | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Create a VPC with two networks with one VM in each network and test nics 
after destroy ... === TestName: test_01_VPC_nics_after_destroy | Status : 
SUCCESS ===
ok
Create a VPC with two networks with one VM in each network and test default 
routes ... === TestName: test_02_VPC_default_routes | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Check the password file in the Router VM ... === TestName: 
test_isolate_network_password_server | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Check that the /etc/dhcphosts.txt doesn't contain duplicate IPs ... === 
TestName: test_router_dhcphosts | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test to create Load balancing rule with source NAT ... === TestName: 
test_01_create_lb_rule_src_nat | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test to create Load balancing rule with non source NAT ... === TestName: 
test_02_create_lb_rule_non_nat | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test for assign & removing load balancing rule ... === TestName: 
test_assign_and_removal_lb | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test to verify access to loadbalancer haproxy admin stats page ... === 
TestName: test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces | Status : SUCCESS 
===
ok
Test create, assign, remove of an Internal LB with roundrobin http traffic 
to 3 vm's ... === TestName: test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80 
| Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test SSVM Internals ... === TestName: test_03_ssvm_internals | Status : 
SUCCESS ===
ok
Test CPVM Internals ... === TestName: test_04_cpvm_internals | Status : 
SUCCESS ===
ok
Test stop SSVM ... === TestName: test_05_stop_ssvm | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test stop CPVM ... === TestName: test_06_stop_cpvm | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test reboot SSVM ... === TestName: test_07_reboot_ssvm | Status : SUCCESS 
===
ok
Test reboot CPVM ... === TestName: test_08_reboot_cpvm | Status : SUCCESS 
===
ok
Test destroy SSVM ... === TestName: test_09_destroy_ssvm | Status : SUCCESS 
===
ok
Test destroy CPVM ... === TestName: test_10_destroy_cpvm | Status : SUCCESS 
===
ok
Test for port forwarding on source NAT ... === TestName: 
test_01_port_fwd_on_src_nat | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test for port forwarding on non source NAT ... === TestName: 
test_02_port_fwd_on_non_src_nat | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
Test for reboot router ... === TestName: test_reboot_router | Status : 
SUCCESS ===
ok
Test for Router rules for network rules on acquired public IP ... === 
TestName: test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_1_static_nat_rule | Status : 
SUCCESS ===
ok
Test for Router rules for network rules on acquired public IP ... === 
TestName: test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_2_nat_rule | Status : SUCCESS 
===
ok
Test for Router rules for network rules on acquired public IP ... === 
TestName: test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_3_Load_Balancer_Rule | Status : 
SUCCESS ===
ok

--
Ran 29 tests in 12286.445s

OK
```


And:

```
nosetests --with-marvin --marvin-config=${marvinCfg} -s -a 
tags=advanced,required_hardware=false \
smoke/test_routers.py \
smoke/test_network_acl.py \
smoke/test_privategw_acl.py \

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: [4.7] CLOUDSTACK-8715: qemu-guest-agent s...

[wido]

Github user wido commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1027#issuecomment-154403884
  
@ustcweizhou I looked at the code more closely and it looks good.

However, I would still vote for having the Agent port always enabled. This 
saves a lot of code and a lot of testing as well.

I would also remove the Python code and write a Java Util which directly 
talks to the local Unix socket.

So, we always enable a Guest Agent port and when we want to talk to the 
Instance we send a ping. If it responds, it responds. If not, we assume there 
is no Agent in there.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: [4.7] CLOUDSTACK-8715: qemu-guest-agent s...

[ustcweizhou]

Github user ustcweizhou commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1027#issuecomment-154405884
  
@wido thanks for your review. good to hear that.
There are 5 commits by me in this PR. You can cherry-pick the commits you 
need to your branch and continue your work :)

The function checkGuestAgentSync in the commit is used to verify if the 
guest agent works.
 


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Remi Bergsma]

Hi Raja,

Thanks for the report. Most of these seem test-case related. For any issue you 
doubt this, can you please verify them manually?

If it doesn’t work, please file a Jira issue (with details and stept) and set 
it to critical. It will then show up on the list of issues and we can discuss 
how to proceed.

https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12332940 (requires login)


Regards,
Remi




On 06/11/15 12:07, "Raja Pullela"  wrote:

>Here is the BVT report on the RC
>KVM Basic – 98.6% , one test failed//test case issue
>KVM Adv – 96.3%, four tests failed //couple due to VM deployment and couple 
>due to test case issue
>XS Basic – 97.2%, two tests failed//test case issues
>XS Adv – 93.5%, seven tests failed //4 due to VM deployment and 3 due to test 
>case issues
>HyperV – 93.3%, seven tests failed
>Simulator – need to run them… will report later today/tomorrow.
>
>
>Failed test cases:
>· 
>integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcRemoteAccessVpn.test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
> //failed due to VM deployment
>· 
>integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcSite2SiteVpn.test_vpc_site2site_vpn 
>//failed due to VM deployment
>· 
>integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces
> //failed due to VM deployment
>· 
>integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80
> //failed due to VM deployment
>· 
>integration.smoke.test_over_provisioning.TestUpdateOverProvision.test_UpdateStorageOverProvisioningFactor
> //test case issue
>· 
>integration.smoke.test_vm_snapshots.TestSnapshots.test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot
> //test case issue
>· integration.smoke.test_iso.TestISO.test_07_list_default_iso //test 
>case issue
>:setup  //test case issue
>
>From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pull...@citrix.com]
>Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:30 PM
>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>
>
>Here is the BVT report on the RC -
>
>[cid:image001.png@01D118B0.21037340]
>
>
>
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com]
>Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:19 PM
>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>
>
>
>Thanks again, Lucian!
>
>
>
>I’m already working on 9015 and testing few things, hope to get it fixed soon, 
>but not for 4.6.0.
>
>
>
>If we kan keep the good work in terms of writing/executing tests - which will 
>help keeping Master stable - and also avoid merges that don’t follow the 
>rule(*), we can have a 4.6.1/4.7.0 (new features) within two month from now.
>
>
>
>So, let us all keep the great work concerning tests/quality/stability.
>
>
>
>Cheers,
>
>Wilder
>
>
>
>* 2 LGTMs + tests (written/executed)
>
>
>
>
>
>> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:49, Nux! > wrote:
>
>>
>
>> Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:
>
>>
>
>> 9015 - it sounds somewhat serious, I'll try to test these days what
>
>> happens if one of the VRs crashes, that's when we'd need redundancy in
>
>> a more "real" scenario, if we could get this fixed before release it'd
>
>> be ideal, Remi should know more re correct procedure here
>
>>
>
>> 9035 - sounds like a non-issue to me, if I want to reset the password  and 
>> the backup router does what it's told, then I don't care it doesn't have the 
>> old passwords from the other router cached. This could impact instance 
>> deployments or passwd resets right in the time BACKUP becomes MASTER. How 
>> long is this generally?
>
>>
>
>> Lucian
>
>>
>
>> --
>
>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>
>>
>
>> Nux!
>
>> www.nux.ro
>
>>
>
>> - Original Message -
>
>>> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
>>> >
>
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>
>>> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 09:29:56
>
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>
>>
>
>>> Thanks for the clear message, Lucian. I really appreciated that. :)
>
>>>
>
>>> It’s about the Redundant VPC, not the single one - which is working
>
>>> pretty fine, btw!
>
>>>
>
>>> Open issues are:
>
>>>
>
>>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9015
>
>>> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9035
>
>>>
>
>>> And I have to write tests to cover Private Gateway and S2S VPN for
>
>>> Redundant VPC.
>
>>>
>
>>> All the rest working fine, as you have seen in my report.
>
>>>
>
>>> Cheers,
>
>>> Wilder
>
>>>
>
>>>
>
>>> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:19, Nux! 
>>> >>
>>>  wrote:
>
>>>
>
>>> Well, in my non-coder opinion, we should not deliver broken software,
>
>>> however we saw in the past fixing it all delayed release considerably.
>
>>> Now, how broken is that VPC? :)

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Rohit Yadav]

+1 (binding)

Based on tests performed with NFS/local storage and Ubuntu/CentOS based KVM 
hosts with both Basic/Advanced zones with/without security groups.


From: Remi Bergsma 
Sent: Wednesday, November 4, 2015 8:25 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

Hi all,

I've created a 4.6.0 release candidate, with the following artifacts up for a 
vote:

Git Branch and Commit SH:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shortlog;h=4.6.0-RC20151104T1522

Commit: b0ebe68e375432b28eef031ab62ccd5831234c77

Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same
location):
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.6.0/

PGP release keys (signed using A47DDC4F):
https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS

Vote will be open for at least 72 hours.

For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to indicate 
"(binding)" with their vote?

[ ] +1  approve
[ ] +0  no opinion
[ ] -1  disapprove (and reason why)

Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services

IaaS Cloud Design & Build
CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework
CloudStack Consulting
CloudStack Software 
Engineering
CloudStack Infrastructure 
Support
CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses

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 SA Pty Ltd is a company 
registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from 
Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.

Re: [RFC] Metrics views for CloudStack UI

[Rohit Yadav]

Hi Lucian,

- We are showing number of cores on the instances metrics view
- We can increase the width of the container/list-view but the UI assumes 
1024px to be the width and with this assumption several widgets/css rules are 
put in place, so it's a challenge to get it right without breaking seen/unseen 
widgets and views. For such reasons, the columns are made collapsible to hide a 
group of columns in case you don't want to use horizontal scrolling and widths 
of columns made shorter to pack more information (increase the information 
density). The other issue is all the widgets you see are created by JS code 
(directly using DOM manupulations) so it's hard to reason about responsive 
widgets (many have fixed widths, or absolute positions based on where the 
container starts etc). I can try if we can somehow implement a responsive 
design/container.

Regards.



From: Nux! 
Sent: Thursday, November 5, 2015 11:05 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Metrics views for CloudStack UI

Great work Rohit,

What I'd like to see:
- vCPU list/count for instance metrics (GHz is meaningless to me)
- can we make the whole thing wider so we can fit more columns there without 
that ugly horizontal scroll bar? So much wasted screen space

--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro

- Original Message -
> From: "Rohit Yadav" 
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
> Sent: Thursday, 5 November, 2015 14:09:14
> Subject: [RFC] Metrics views for CloudStack UI

> Hi all,
>
> The present CloudStack UI hides most of the metrics data such as cpu, memory,
> disk, network usage in inner detail views. Such information is critical to 
> find
> issues in one’s cloud, for example finding clusters where hosts are failing, 
> or
> finding storage pools where disk space has depleted beyond configured global 
> or
> cluster thresholds.
>
> The metrics views for CloudStack UI is an attempt to solve those problems that
> brings in several UI enhancements such as sortable tables, new status icons,
> methods to control breadcrumb navigation, making UI’s global list* API 
> pagesize
> dynamic, a new table widget based on listView widget that is both horizontally
> and vertically scrollable, supports cell/threshold coloring, collapsible
> columns along with navigation from one view to another and quick-view actions.
> For example, currently support navigation are: Zone to Cluster to Host to
> Instance to Volumes, and Storage Pool to Volumes.
>
> The current version implements six resource views for zone, cluster, host,
> instance, volume and storage pool (primary storage). The metrics framework
> (based on listView widget) would allow developers to write more such view 
> where
> information can be densely packed.
>
> Please checkout the FS (with some screenshots) and the PR;
>
> FS: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9020
> JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9020
> PR: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1038
>
> Comments and suggestions?
>
> Regards,
> Rohit Yadav
> Software Architect, ShapeBlue
>
>
> [cid:image003.png@01D104EF.CE276C40]
>
>
> M. +91 88 262 30892 |
> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab
> ShapeBlue Ltd, 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London, WC2N 4HS
>
> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services
>
> IaaS Cloud Design & Build
> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework
> CloudStack Consulting
> CloudStack Software
> Engineering
> CloudStack Infrastructure
> Support
> CloudStack Bootcamp Training 
> Courses
>
> 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 SA Pty Ltd is a company registered by
> The Republic of South Africa 

Re: [RFC] Metrics views for CloudStack UI

[Rohit Yadav]

Hi Wido,

Yes, we can do that but the issue here is we'll have to make a listVMs call for 
each zone/host row in respective metric views, such changes would cause several 
API requests and UI to block for longer times. The other option could be to 
implement new sets of APIs that aggregate data at the backend so that the 
client/UI won't need to make several API calls.

Regards.


From: Wido den Hollander 
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 1:45 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Metrics views for CloudStack UI

On 11/05/2015 03:09 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The present CloudStack UI hides most of the metrics data such as cpu, memory, 
> disk, network usage in inner detail views. Such information is critical to 
> find issues in one’s cloud, for example finding clusters where hosts are 
> failing, or finding storage pools where disk space has depleted beyond 
> configured global or cluster thresholds.
>
> The metrics views for CloudStack UI is an attempt to solve those problems 
> that brings in several UI enhancements such as sortable tables, new status 
> icons, methods to control breadcrumb navigation, making UI’s global list* API 
> pagesize dynamic, a new table widget based on listView widget that is both 
> horizontally and vertically scrollable, supports cell/threshold coloring, 
> collapsible columns along with navigation from one view to another and 
> quick-view actions. For example, currently support navigation are: Zone to 
> Cluster to Host to Instance to Volumes, and Storage Pool to Volumes.
>
> The current version implements six resource views for zone, cluster, host, 
> instance, volume and storage pool (primary storage). The metrics framework 
> (based on listView widget) would allow developers to write more such view 
> where information can be densely packed.
>
> Please checkout the FS (with some screenshots) and the PR;
>
> FS: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9020
> JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9020
> PR: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1038
>
> Comments and suggestions?
>

Overall it looks very good, but I personally would like to see the
amount of Instances per Zone/Host in a Quick overview, that's what
lacking currently imho.

Would that be easy to do?

Wido

> Regards,
> Rohit Yadav
> Software Architect, ShapeBlue
>
>
> [cid:image003.png@01D104EF.CE276C40]
>
>
> M. +91 88 262 30892 | 
> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab
> ShapeBlue Ltd, 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London, WC2N 4HS
>
> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services
>
> IaaS Cloud Design & Build
> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework
> CloudStack Consulting
> CloudStack Software 
> Engineering
> CloudStack Infrastructure 
> Support
> CloudStack Bootcamp Training 
> Courses
>
> 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 SA Pty Ltd is a company 
> registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from 
> Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.
>
Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services

IaaS Cloud Design & Build
CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework
CloudStack Consulting
CloudStack Software 
Engineering
CloudStack Infrastructure 
Support
CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses

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 

Re: [RFC] Metrics views for CloudStack UI

[Rohit Yadav]

Hi Stephan,

Domain admins are not shown infrastructure tab, so while they may still access 
metrics view for instances and volumes, they won't be able to see metrics for 
rest of the resources (zones, clusters, hosts and storage pool). I'll discuss 
and incorporate changes to allow showing volume and instances metrics.

Regards.


From: Stephan Seitz 
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 3:17 PM
To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Metrics views for CloudStack UI

This looks really great!
You've added the metrics view at the Infrastructure tab. This is nice
for the platform ops.
I assume the very same metrics would also be a benefit for domain-admins
(say: customers). I'ld suggest to add this view somewhere below the
Instances tab.

cheers,

- Stephan


Am Donnerstag, den 05.11.2015, 14:09 + schrieb Rohit Yadav:
> Hi all,
>
>
> The present CloudStack UI hides most of the metrics data such as cpu,
> memory, disk, network usage in inner detail views. Such information is
> critical to find issues in one’s cloud, for example finding clusters
> where hosts are failing, or finding storage pools where disk space has
> depleted beyond configured global or cluster thresholds.
>
>
> The metrics views for CloudStack UI is an attempt to solve those
> problems that brings in several UI enhancements such as sortable
> tables, new status icons, methods to control breadcrumb navigation,
> making UI’s global list* API pagesize dynamic, a new table widget
> based on listView widget that is both horizontally and vertically
> scrollable, supports cell/threshold coloring, collapsible columns
> along with navigation from one view to another and quick-view actions.
> For example, currently support navigation are: Zone to Cluster to Host
> to Instance to Volumes, and Storage Pool to Volumes.
>
>
> The current version implements six resource views for zone, cluster,
> host, instance, volume and storage pool (primary storage). The metrics
> framework (based on listView widget) would allow developers to write
> more such view where information can be densely packed.
>
>
> Please checkout the FS (with some screenshots) and the PR;
>
>
> FS: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9020
> JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9020
> PR: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1038
>
>
> Comments and suggestions?
>
> Regards,
> Rohit Yadav
> Software Architect, ShapeBlue
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab
> ShapeBlue Ltd, 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London, WC2N 4HS
>
> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related
> services
>
> IaaS Cloud Design & Build
> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework
> CloudStack Consulting
> CloudStack Software Engineering
> CloudStack Infrastructure Support
> CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses
>
>
> 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 SA
> Pty Ltd is a company registered by The Republic of South Africa and is
> traded under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue is a registered
> trademark.


Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services

IaaS Cloud Design & Build
CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework
CloudStack Consulting
CloudStack Software 
Engineering
CloudStack Infrastructure 
Support
CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses

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 

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[David Amorim da Cruz Faria]

Hi Paul,

the cloudstack-setup-management tool exits without error and the management
server starts fine.
These files are currently missing from packaging/centos7/tomcat7 but are
used by the tool.

[root@mgmt01 ~]# cloudstack-setup-management
Starting to configure CloudStack Management Server:
Configure Firewall ...[OK]
Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed]
Cannot find /etc/cloudstack/management/server-nonssl.xml or
/etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-nonssl.conf, https enables failed
Try to restore your system:
Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]

[root@mgmt01 ~]# echo $?
0

[root@mgmt01 ~]# cloudstack-setup-management --https
Starting to configure CloudStack Management Server:
Configure Firewall ...[OK]
Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed]
Cannot find /etc/cloudstack/management/server-ssl.xml or
/etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-ssl.conf, https enables failed
Try to restore your system:
Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]

[root@mgmt01 ~]# echo $?
0

[root@mgmt01 ~]# systemctl restart cloudstack-management

[root@mgmt01 ~]# systemctl status cloudstack-management -l
cloudstack-management.service - CloudStack Management Server
   Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/cloudstack-management.service;
enabled)
   Active: active (running) since vr 2015-11-06 14:31:15 UTC; 11s ago
  Process: 4475 ExecStop=/usr/libexec/tomcat/server stop (code=exited,
status=0/SUCCESS)
 Main PID: 4530 (java)
   CGroup: /system.slice/cloudstack-management.service
   └─4530 java -Djava.awt.headless=true
-Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote=false -Xmx2g -XX:+HeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError
-XX:HeapDumpPath=/var/log/cloudstack/management/ -XX:PermSize=512M
-XX:MaxPermSize=800m -classpath
/etc/cloudstack/management:/usr/share/cloudstack-common:/usr/share/cloudstack-management/setup:/usr/share/java/mysql-connector-java.jar:/usr/share/cloudstack-management/bin/bootstrap.jar:/usr/share/cloudstack-management/bin/tomcat-juli.jar:/usr/share/java/commons-daemon.jar
-Dcatalina.base=/usr/share/cloudstack-management
-Dcatalina.home=/usr/share/cloudstack-management -Djava.endorsed.dirs=
-Djava.io.tmpdir=/usr/share/cloudstack-management/temp
-Djava.util.logging.config.file=/usr/share/cloudstack-management/conf/logging.properties
-Djava.util.logging.manager=org.apache.juli.ClassLoaderLogManager
org.apache.catalina.startup.Bootstrap start

[lots of irrelevant stuff]

>From /var/log/cloudstack/management/management-server.log:
2015-11-06 14:33:46,288 DEBUG [c.c.a.ClusterAlertAdapter]
(Cluster-Notification-1:ctx-dd28a932) Management server n
ode 10.13.95.31 is up, send alert



Regards,
David Amorim Faria

On 6 November 2015 at 14:49, Paul Angus  wrote:

> Sorry guys.  CentOS 7 install is NOT fixed in 4.6.0-RC20151104T1522.
>
>
> Sorry had to fly out to client in Kenya, so not been able to work on it
> recently.
>
> -1
>
> [root@CentOS7ACSTest ~]# cloudstack-setup-management
> Starting to configure CloudStack Management Server:
> Configure Firewall ...[OK]
> Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed]
> Cannot find /etc/cloudstack/management/server-nonssl.xml or
> /etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-nonssl.conf, https enables failed
> Try to restore your system:
> Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
> Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Paul Angus
> VP Technology/Cloud Architect
> S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447711418784 | T: CloudyAngus
> paul.an...@shapeblue.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:rberg...@schubergphilis.com]
> Sent: 06 November 2015 13:33
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>
> Hi Raja,
>
> Thanks for the report. Most of these seem test-case related. For any issue
> you doubt this, can you please verify them manually?
>
> If it doesn’t work, please file a Jira issue (with details and stept) and
> set it to critical. It will then show up on the list of issues and we can
> discuss how to proceed.
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12332940 (requires login)
>
>
> Regards,
> Remi
>
>
>
>
> On 06/11/15 12:07, "Raja Pullela"  wrote:
>
> >Here is the BVT report on the RC
> >KVM Basic – 98.6% , one test failed//test case issue KVM Adv – 96.3%,
> >four tests failed //couple due to VM deployment and couple due to test
> >case issue XS Basic – 97.2%, two tests failed//test case issues XS Adv
> >– 93.5%, seven tests failed //4 due to VM deployment and 3 due to test
> >case issues HyperV – 93.3%, seven tests failed Simulator – need to run
> >them… will report later today/tomorrow.
> >
> >
> >Failed test cases:
> >·
>  
> integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcRemoteAccessVpn.test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
> //failed due to VM deployment
> >·
>  integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcSite2SiteVpn.test_vpc_site2site_vpn
> //failed due to VM deployment

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9042: VR: DHCP: fix missing DH...

[resmo]

Github user resmo commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1042#issuecomment-154426348
  
@remibergsma @ustcweizhou updated and rebased the patch with some more 
fixes... 


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9042: VR: DHCP: fix missing DH...

[remibergsma]

Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1042#issuecomment-154430267
  
@resmo @ustcweizhou This script is not used in 4.6 I'd say. There is a 
python class called CsDhcp.py that handles this.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Paul Angus]

The messages plainly say that:

Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed]

That is showing an error.

It then says that it successfully rolled back.

Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]

You then restart it yourself manually after forcing https

systemctl restart cloudstack-management


IMO that is not an acceptable user experience.

If there are missing files and incorrect links due to CentOS 7 using tomcat7 
then they need to be added to the packaging before the issue can be said to be 
fixed.
This is why it was taking me so long to untangle all of the changes required 
for centos7.

serviceConfigServer.py  (deal with tomcat6&7 + sudoers)
syscfg.py (system for rhel7 for *server* not included)
and  /packaging/centos7/cloud.spec (tomcat7 conf files need adding)


Regards,

Paul Angus
VP Technology/Cloud Architect
S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447711418784 | T: CloudyAngus
paul.an...@shapeblue.com

-Original Message-
From: David Amorim da Cruz Faria [mailto:da...@amorim-cruz.net]
Sent: 06 November 2015 14:36
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

Hi Paul,

the cloudstack-setup-management tool exits without error and the management 
server starts fine.
These files are currently missing from packaging/centos7/tomcat7 but are used 
by the tool.

[root@mgmt01 ~]# cloudstack-setup-management Starting to configure CloudStack 
Management Server:
Configure Firewall ...[OK]
Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed] Cannot find 
/etc/cloudstack/management/server-nonssl.xml or 
/etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-nonssl.conf, https enables failed Try to 
restore your system:
Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]

[root@mgmt01 ~]# echo $?
0

[root@mgmt01 ~]# cloudstack-setup-management --https Starting to configure 
CloudStack Management Server:
Configure Firewall ...[OK]
Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed] Cannot find 
/etc/cloudstack/management/server-ssl.xml or 
/etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-ssl.conf, https enables failed Try to 
restore your system:
Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]

[root@mgmt01 ~]# echo $?
0

[root@mgmt01 ~]# systemctl restart cloudstack-management

[root@mgmt01 ~]# systemctl status cloudstack-management -l 
cloudstack-management.service - CloudStack Management Server
   Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/cloudstack-management.service;
enabled)
   Active: active (running) since vr 2015-11-06 14:31:15 UTC; 11s ago
  Process: 4475 ExecStop=/usr/libexec/tomcat/server stop (code=exited,
status=0/SUCCESS)
 Main PID: 4530 (java)
   CGroup: /system.slice/cloudstack-management.service
   └─4530 java -Djava.awt.headless=true 
-Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote=false -Xmx2g -XX:+HeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError 
-XX:HeapDumpPath=/var/log/cloudstack/management/ -XX:PermSize=512M 
-XX:MaxPermSize=800m -classpath 
/etc/cloudstack/management:/usr/share/cloudstack-common:/usr/share/cloudstack-management/setup:/usr/share/java/mysql-connector-java.jar:/usr/share/cloudstack-management/bin/bootstrap.jar:/usr/share/cloudstack-management/bin/tomcat-juli.jar:/usr/share/java/commons-daemon.jar
-Dcatalina.base=/usr/share/cloudstack-management
-Dcatalina.home=/usr/share/cloudstack-management -Djava.endorsed.dirs= 
-Djava.io.tmpdir=/usr/share/cloudstack-management/temp
-Djava.util.logging.config.file=/usr/share/cloudstack-management/conf/logging.properties
-Djava.util.logging.manager=org.apache.juli.ClassLoaderLogManager
org.apache.catalina.startup.Bootstrap start

[lots of irrelevant stuff]

From /var/log/cloudstack/management/management-server.log:
2015-11-06 14:33:46,288 DEBUG [c.c.a.ClusterAlertAdapter]
(Cluster-Notification-1:ctx-dd28a932) Management server n ode 10.13.95.31 is 
up, send alert



Regards,
David Amorim Faria

On 6 November 2015 at 14:49, Paul Angus  wrote:

> Sorry guys.  CentOS 7 install is NOT fixed in 4.6.0-RC20151104T1522.
>
>
> Sorry had to fly out to client in Kenya, so not been able to work on
> it recently.
>
> -1
>
> [root@CentOS7ACSTest ~]# cloudstack-setup-management Starting to
> configure CloudStack Management Server:
> Configure Firewall ...[OK]
> Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed] Cannot find
> /etc/cloudstack/management/server-nonssl.xml or
> /etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-nonssl.conf, https enables failed
> Try to restore your system:
> Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
> Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Paul Angus
> VP Technology/Cloud Architect
> S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447711418784 | T: CloudyAngus
> paul.an...@shapeblue.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:rberg...@schubergphilis.com]
> Sent: 06 November 2015 13:33
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>
> Hi Raja,
>
> Thanks for the report. Most of 

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9042: VR: DHCP: fix missing DH...

[resmo]

Github user resmo commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1042#issuecomment-154436021
  
@remibergsma okay, never mind for false alarm then.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Metrics views for CloudStack UI

[bhaisaab]

Github user bhaisaab commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1038#issuecomment-154445751
  
@DaanHoogland this is an admin only feature, just do a clean install and 
you should see this logged in as an admin


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9042: VR: DHCP: fix missing DH...

[remibergsma]

Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1042#issuecomment-154446597
  
@resmo That's all fine, glad you took the time to submit this. You may want 
to send the same PR against 4.5, as it is definitely relevant there. 

And, maybe you can repeat the test you did against 4.6, so we know if it 
works fine in 4.6. It uses other code, but there could still be an issue.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Remi Bergsma]

Hi Paul,

I just tried it, see the same message but also see it actually works. 
Management server starts and I can see the UI and work from that. I don’t see 
this as a blocking issue.

On a more generic note, I think we need to move the packaging scripts to their 
own repository and iterate them separately from CloudStack itself. The ASF 
doesn’t deliver the packages anyway, so we better make it more flexible. The 
packaging scripts now compile the source. We should put our artifacts on Maven 
Central and use those in the packaging instead.

Any change on the packaging needs to be automatically tested (including 
installs) so we prevent ending up in this situation.

If we do this, we will have cloudstack-management-4.6.0-0 packages, make a fix 
to them and we’ll have cloudstack-management-4.6.0-1, etc. Package managers 
know very well how to handle this. The problems found now, can be addressed 
separately and make a new package, as the CloudStack code itself doesn’t 
change. 

TL;DR CloudStack is fine, hence it has never been in such a good shape. @all 
please continue the testing.


Regards,
Remi


On 06/11/15 16:00, "Paul Angus"  wrote:

>The messages plainly say that:
>
>Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed]
>
>That is showing an error.
>
>It then says that it successfully rolled back.
>
>Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
>Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]
>
>You then restart it yourself manually after forcing https
>
>systemctl restart cloudstack-management
>
>
>IMO that is not an acceptable user experience.
>
>If there are missing files and incorrect links due to CentOS 7 using tomcat7 
>then they need to be added to the packaging before the issue can be said to be 
>fixed.
>This is why it was taking me so long to untangle all of the changes required 
>for centos7.
>
>serviceConfigServer.py  (deal with tomcat6&7 + sudoers)
>syscfg.py (system for rhel7 for *server* not included)
>and  /packaging/centos7/cloud.spec (tomcat7 conf files need adding)
>
>
>Regards,
>
>Paul Angus
>VP Technology/Cloud Architect
>S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447711418784 | T: CloudyAngus
>paul.an...@shapeblue.com
>
>-Original Message-
>From: David Amorim da Cruz Faria [mailto:da...@amorim-cruz.net]
>Sent: 06 November 2015 14:36
>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>
>Hi Paul,
>
>the cloudstack-setup-management tool exits without error and the management 
>server starts fine.
>These files are currently missing from packaging/centos7/tomcat7 but are used 
>by the tool.
>
>[root@mgmt01 ~]# cloudstack-setup-management Starting to configure CloudStack 
>Management Server:
>Configure Firewall ...[OK]
>Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed] Cannot find 
>/etc/cloudstack/management/server-nonssl.xml or 
>/etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-nonssl.conf, https enables failed Try to 
>restore your system:
>Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
>Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]
>
>[root@mgmt01 ~]# echo $?
>0
>
>[root@mgmt01 ~]# cloudstack-setup-management --https Starting to configure 
>CloudStack Management Server:
>Configure Firewall ...[OK]
>Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed] Cannot find 
>/etc/cloudstack/management/server-ssl.xml or 
>/etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-ssl.conf, https enables failed Try to 
>restore your system:
>Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
>Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]
>
>[root@mgmt01 ~]# echo $?
>0
>
>[root@mgmt01 ~]# systemctl restart cloudstack-management
>
>[root@mgmt01 ~]# systemctl status cloudstack-management -l 
>cloudstack-management.service - CloudStack Management Server
>   Loaded: loaded (/usr/lib/systemd/system/cloudstack-management.service;
>enabled)
>   Active: active (running) since vr 2015-11-06 14:31:15 UTC; 11s ago
>  Process: 4475 ExecStop=/usr/libexec/tomcat/server stop (code=exited,
>status=0/SUCCESS)
> Main PID: 4530 (java)
>   CGroup: /system.slice/cloudstack-management.service
>   └─4530 java -Djava.awt.headless=true 
> -Dcom.sun.management.jmxremote=false -Xmx2g -XX:+HeapDumpOnOutOfMemoryError 
> -XX:HeapDumpPath=/var/log/cloudstack/management/ -XX:PermSize=512M 
> -XX:MaxPermSize=800m -classpath 
> /etc/cloudstack/management:/usr/share/cloudstack-common:/usr/share/cloudstack-management/setup:/usr/share/java/mysql-connector-java.jar:/usr/share/cloudstack-management/bin/bootstrap.jar:/usr/share/cloudstack-management/bin/tomcat-juli.jar:/usr/share/java/commons-daemon.jar
>-Dcatalina.base=/usr/share/cloudstack-management
>-Dcatalina.home=/usr/share/cloudstack-management -Djava.endorsed.dirs= 
>-Djava.io.tmpdir=/usr/share/cloudstack-management/temp
>-Djava.util.logging.config.file=/usr/share/cloudstack-management/conf/logging.properties
>-Djava.util.logging.manager=org.apache.juli.ClassLoaderLogManager
>org.apache.catalina.startup.Bootstrap start
>
>[lots of irrelevant stuff]
>
>From 

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9043 Remove \n (new line) in G...

[milamberspace]

GitHub user milamberspace opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1043

CLOUDSTACK-9043 Remove \n (new line) in German and Chinese translation

The new line isn't in the original strings and are invalid character in the 
javascript files/ui


Tested with success on Chrome

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/milamberspace/cloudstack 
CLOUDSTACK-9043-Unexpected-token-ILLEGAL_de_DE-zh_CN

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1043.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1043


commit 813cbc0c571eab465fe8d380df920ada4f62141c
Author: Milamber 
Date:   2015-11-06T15:37:23Z

Remove \n (new line) in German and Chinese translation

The new line isn't in the original strings and are invalid character in the 
javascript files/ui




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Metrics views for CloudStack UI

[milamberspace]

Github user milamberspace commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1038#issuecomment-154384773
  

![selection_172](https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/3995882/10995941/902c0abe-8478-11e5-922a-b3b742e3b7ef.png)
@DaanHoogland see the capture


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9040: Use Tomcat6 for Debian p...

[remibergsma]

Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1040#issuecomment-154405274
  
Can someone please post some results of a successful install after this 
change?


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9042: VR: DHCP: fix missing DH...

[resmo]

Github user resmo commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1042#issuecomment-154414891
  
@ustcweizhou seeing some more potential problems.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Wilder Rodrigues]

Hi Raja,

It seems you missed my email with the explanation concerning the VPN + LB 
tests. Since you replied to your own email, my questions were kicked out of the 
thread. Please, see below:

==> Concerning the LB + VPN tests, I also faced issues when ran them 
against XenServer 6.2. The tests are trying to deploy QCOW image based VMs on 
the Xen Host (see my report, please).

Cheers,
Wilder


> On 06 Nov 2015, at 12:04, Wilder Rodrigues  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Raja,
> 
> Concerning the LB + VPN tests, I also faced issues when ran them against 
> XenServer 6.2. The tests is trying to deploy QCOW image based VMs on the 
> XenHost (see my report, please).
> So, did you run the BVT agains Xen or KVM? Because the LB + VPN worked fine 
> on KVM with CentOS 7.1
> 
> Thanks for the report, by the way.
> 
> Cheers,
> Wilder



> On 06 Nov 2015, at 12:11, Raja Pullela  wrote:
> 
> Hi Sebastien, 
> 
> resent the report... 
> Test case issues - we can ignore.  we will should fix them anyways.  
> VM Deployment issues - analyzing them... probably not blockers for now until 
> we find the root cause.  
> 
> best,
> Raja
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Sebastien Goasguen [mailto:run...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:33 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> 
> Thanks Raja,
> 
> Attachments get striped on this mailing list, so I can’t see wha you seem to 
> have attached.
> 
> Also it would be most helpful if you could comment on the errors that you 
> report.
> Do you consider them as blockers, are they related to open issues, shall we 
> discard them ?
> 
> 
> 
>> On Nov 6, 2015, at 12:00 PM, Raja Pullela  wrote:
>> 
>> Here is the BVT report on the RC -
>> 
>> 
>> Failed test cases:
>> · 
>> integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcRemoteAccessVpn.test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
>>  //failed due to VM deployment
>> · 
>> integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcSite2SiteVpn.test_vpc_site2site_vpn 
>> //failed due to VM deployment
>> · 
>> integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces
>>  //failed due to VM deployment
>> · 
>> integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80//failed
>>  due to VM deployment
>> ·
>> integration.smoke.test_over_provisioning.TestUpdateOverProvision.test_UpdateStorageOverProvisioningFactor
>>  //test case issue
>> · 
>> integration.smoke.test_vm_snapshots.TestSnapshots.test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot
>>  //test case issue
>> · integration.smoke.test_iso.TestISO.test_07_list_default_iso //test 
>> case issue
>> :setup  //test 
>> case issue
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com]
>> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:19 PM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>> 
>> Thanks again, Lucian!
>> 
>> I’m already working on 9015 and testing few things, hope to get it fixed 
>> soon, but not for 4.6.0.
>> 
>> If we kan keep the good work in terms of writing/executing tests - which 
>> will help keeping Master stable - and also avoid merges that don’t follow 
>> the rule(*), we can have a 4.6.1/4.7.0 (new features) within two month from 
>> now.
>> 
>> So, let us all keep the great work concerning tests/quality/stability.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Wilder
>> 
>> * 2 LGTMs + tests (written/executed)
>> 
>> 
>>> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:49, Nux!  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:
>>> 
>>> 9015 - it sounds somewhat serious, I'll try to test these days what 
>>> happens if one of the VRs crashes, that's when we'd need redundancy 
>>> in a more "real" scenario, if we could get this fixed before release 
>>> it'd be ideal, Remi should know more re correct procedure here
>>> 
>>> 9035 - sounds like a non-issue to me, if I want to reset the password  and 
>>> the backup router does what it's told, then I don't care it doesn't have 
>>> the old passwords from the other router cached. This could impact instance 
>>> deployments or passwd resets right in the time BACKUP becomes MASTER. How 
>>> long is this generally?
>>> 
>>> Lucian
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>>> 
>>> Nux!
>>> www.nux.ro
>>> 
>>> - Original Message -
 From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
 Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 09:29:56
 Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>>> 
 Thanks for the clear message, Lucian. I really appreciated that. :)
 
 It’s about the Redundant VPC, not the single one - which is working 
 pretty fine, btw!
 
 Open issues are:
 
 * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9015
 * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9035

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9039: Fix paths for logging Ub...

[wido]

Github user wido commented on a diff in the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1039#discussion_r44132316
  
--- Diff: python/lib/cloudutils/serviceConfigServer.py ---
@@ -107,7 +107,8 @@ def checkHostName():
 bash("chown cloud.cloud /var/run/cloudstack-management.pid")
 #distro like sl 6.1 needs this folder, or tomcat6 failed to start
 checkHostName()
-bash("mkdir /var/log/cloudstack-management/")
+bash("mkdir -p /var/log/cloudstack/")
+bash("mkdir -p /var/log/cloudstack/management/")
--- End diff --

Both lines can be removed. The packaging already creates them.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Paul Angus]

Sorry guys.  CentOS 7 install is NOT fixed in 4.6.0-RC20151104T1522.


Sorry had to fly out to client in Kenya, so not been able to work on it 
recently.

-1

[root@CentOS7ACSTest ~]# cloudstack-setup-management
Starting to configure CloudStack Management Server:
Configure Firewall ...[OK]
Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed]
Cannot find /etc/cloudstack/management/server-nonssl.xml or 
/etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-nonssl.conf, https enables failed
Try to restore your system:
Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]




Regards,

Paul Angus
VP Technology/Cloud Architect
S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447711418784 | T: CloudyAngus
paul.an...@shapeblue.com

-Original Message-
From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:rberg...@schubergphilis.com]
Sent: 06 November 2015 13:33
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

Hi Raja,

Thanks for the report. Most of these seem test-case related. For any issue you 
doubt this, can you please verify them manually?

If it doesn’t work, please file a Jira issue (with details and stept) and set 
it to critical. It will then show up on the list of issues and we can discuss 
how to proceed.

https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12332940 (requires login)


Regards,
Remi




On 06/11/15 12:07, "Raja Pullela"  wrote:

>Here is the BVT report on the RC
>KVM Basic – 98.6% , one test failed//test case issue KVM Adv – 96.3%,
>four tests failed //couple due to VM deployment and couple due to test
>case issue XS Basic – 97.2%, two tests failed//test case issues XS Adv
>– 93.5%, seven tests failed //4 due to VM deployment and 3 due to test
>case issues HyperV – 93.3%, seven tests failed Simulator – need to run
>them… will report later today/tomorrow.
>
>
>Failed test cases:
>· 
>integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcRemoteAccessVpn.test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
> //failed due to VM deployment
>· 
>integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcSite2SiteVpn.test_vpc_site2site_vpn 
>//failed due to VM deployment
>· 
>integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces
> //failed due to VM deployment
>· 
>integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80
> //failed due to VM deployment
>· 
>integration.smoke.test_over_provisioning.TestUpdateOverProvision.test_UpdateStorageOverProvisioningFactor
> //test case issue
>· 
>integration.smoke.test_vm_snapshots.TestSnapshots.test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot
> //test case issue
>· integration.smoke.test_iso.TestISO.test_07_list_default_iso //test 
>case issue
>:setup  //test
>case issue
>
>From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pull...@citrix.com]
>Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:30 PM
>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>
>
>Here is the BVT report on the RC -
>
>[cid:image001.png@01D118B0.21037340]
>
>
>
>
>
>-Original Message-
>From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com]
>Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:19 PM
>To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>
>
>
>Thanks again, Lucian!
>
>
>
>I’m already working on 9015 and testing few things, hope to get it fixed soon, 
>but not for 4.6.0.
>
>
>
>If we kan keep the good work in terms of writing/executing tests - which will 
>help keeping Master stable - and also avoid merges that don’t follow the 
>rule(*), we can have a 4.6.1/4.7.0 (new features) within two month from now.
>
>
>
>So, let us all keep the great work concerning tests/quality/stability.
>
>
>
>Cheers,
>
>Wilder
>
>
>
>* 2 LGTMs + tests (written/executed)
>
>
>
>
>
>> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:49, Nux! > wrote:
>
>>
>
>> Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:
>
>>
>
>> 9015 - it sounds somewhat serious, I'll try to test these days what
>
>> happens if one of the VRs crashes, that's when we'd need redundancy
>> in
>
>> a more "real" scenario, if we could get this fixed before release
>> it'd
>
>> be ideal, Remi should know more re correct procedure here
>
>>
>
>> 9035 - sounds like a non-issue to me, if I want to reset the password  and 
>> the backup router does what it's told, then I don't care it doesn't have the 
>> old passwords from the other router cached. This could impact instance 
>> deployments or passwd resets right in the time BACKUP becomes MASTER. How 
>> long is this generally?
>
>>
>
>> Lucian
>
>>
>
>> --
>
>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>
>>
>
>> Nux!
>
>> www.nux.ro
>
>>
>
>> - Original Message -
>
>>> From: "Wilder Rodrigues"
>>> 
>>> >
>
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>
>>> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 09:29:56
>
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] 

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Metrics views for CloudStack UI

[DaanHoogland]

Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1038#issuecomment-154399546
  
thanks guys, missed that. Should I do anything more then just run with this 
change? an option some where? I am not seeing the metrix bottun in the zone 
view.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9042: VR: DHCP: fix missing DH...

[remibergsma]

Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1042#issuecomment-154404851
  
FYI: Started tests on this branch.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9039: Fix paths for logging Ub...

[borisroman]

Github user borisroman commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1039#issuecomment-154409103
  
@remibergsma @ustcweizhou As @wido pointed out, they are already created 
through the packager.

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/master/debian/rules#L61

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/master/debian/cloudstack-management.install#L43


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9039: Fix paths for logging Ub...

[borisroman]

Github user borisroman commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1039#issuecomment-154411673
  
@wido @ustcweizhou Could you review again please?


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-5822: keep user-added sshkeys ...

[ustcweizhou]

GitHub user ustcweizhou opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1044

CLOUDSTACK-5822: keep user-added sshkeys in authorized_keys

For now, if we add the ssh key inside the vm (not on cloudstack UI), the 
sshkey will be removed if we reset the sshkey on cloudstack UI.

After this commit, the sshkey (added by cloudstack) will end with 
cloudst...@apache.org.
We will only control the sshkeys with cloudst...@apache.org.

This will be used for multiple sshkey support for vm in the future.


You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/ustcweizhou/cloudstack keep-sshkey

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1044.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1044


commit 64ef4fa958878ceedfc8009804898f439cdeaf0f
Author: Wei Zhou 
Date:   2015-11-06T13:28:14Z

CLOUDSTACK-5822: keep user-added sshkeys in authorized_keys




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Raja Pullela]

Hi Wilder, 

Saw your email/details... was investigating the failures and wanted to reply 
later.  We will check your report as well.  BTW, I am using XS 6.5 SP1 for 
testing.  

Initial take for couple of the failures is test code for Create VM is passing 
Hypervisor type as KVM for a XS/HyperV env.  The other failures with KVM are 
still being investigated.  Will send more details after I am done,

best,
Raja
-Original Message-
From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com] 
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 5:26 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Sebastien Goasguen 
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

Hi Raja,

It seems you missed my email with the explanation concerning the VPN + LB 
tests. Since you replied to your own email, my questions were kicked out of the 
thread. Please, see below:

==> Concerning the LB + VPN tests, I also faced issues when ran them 
against XenServer 6.2. The tests are trying to deploy QCOW image based VMs on 
the Xen Host (see my report, please).

Cheers,
Wilder


> On 06 Nov 2015, at 12:04, Wilder Rodrigues  
> wrote:
> 
> Hi Raja,
> 
> Concerning the LB + VPN tests, I also faced issues when ran them against 
> XenServer 6.2. The tests is trying to deploy QCOW image based VMs on the 
> XenHost (see my report, please).
> So, did you run the BVT agains Xen or KVM? Because the LB + VPN worked 
> fine on KVM with CentOS 7.1
> 
> Thanks for the report, by the way.
> 
> Cheers,
> Wilder



> On 06 Nov 2015, at 12:11, Raja Pullela  wrote:
> 
> Hi Sebastien,
> 
> resent the report... 
> Test case issues - we can ignore.  we will should fix them anyways.  
> VM Deployment issues - analyzing them... probably not blockers for now until 
> we find the root cause.  
> 
> best,
> Raja
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Sebastien Goasguen [mailto:run...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:33 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> 
> Thanks Raja,
> 
> Attachments get striped on this mailing list, so I can’t see wha you seem to 
> have attached.
> 
> Also it would be most helpful if you could comment on the errors that you 
> report.
> Do you consider them as blockers, are they related to open issues, shall we 
> discard them ?
> 
> 
> 
>> On Nov 6, 2015, at 12:00 PM, Raja Pullela  wrote:
>> 
>> Here is the BVT report on the RC -
>> 
>> 
>> Failed test cases:
>> · 
>> integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcRemoteAccessVpn.test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
>>  //failed due to VM deployment
>> · 
>> integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcSite2SiteVpn.test_vpc_site2site_vpn 
>> //failed due to VM deployment
>> · 
>> integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces
>>  //failed due to VM deployment
>> · 
>> integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80//failed
>>  due to VM deployment
>> ·
>> integration.smoke.test_over_provisioning.TestUpdateOverProvision.test_UpdateStorageOverProvisioningFactor
>>  //test case issue
>> · 
>> integration.smoke.test_vm_snapshots.TestSnapshots.test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot
>>  //test case issue
>> · integration.smoke.test_iso.TestISO.test_07_list_default_iso //test 
>> case issue
>> :setup  //test 
>> case issue
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com]
>> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:19 PM
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>> 
>> Thanks again, Lucian!
>> 
>> I’m already working on 9015 and testing few things, hope to get it fixed 
>> soon, but not for 4.6.0.
>> 
>> If we kan keep the good work in terms of writing/executing tests - which 
>> will help keeping Master stable - and also avoid merges that don’t follow 
>> the rule(*), we can have a 4.6.1/4.7.0 (new features) within two month from 
>> now.
>> 
>> So, let us all keep the great work concerning tests/quality/stability.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Wilder
>> 
>> * 2 LGTMs + tests (written/executed)
>> 
>> 
>>> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:49, Nux!  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:
>>> 
>>> 9015 - it sounds somewhat serious, I'll try to test these days what 
>>> happens if one of the VRs crashes, that's when we'd need redundancy 
>>> in a more "real" scenario, if we could get this fixed before release 
>>> it'd be ideal, Remi should know more re correct procedure here
>>> 
>>> 9035 - sounds like a non-issue to me, if I want to reset the password  and 
>>> the backup router does what it's told, then I don't care it doesn't have 
>>> the old passwords from the other router cached. This could impact instance 
>>> deployments or passwd resets right in the time BACKUP becomes MASTER. How 
>>> long is this generally?
>>> 
>>> Lucian
>>> 

Re: Debian packages 4.6 RC1

[Boris Schrijver]

I've repackaged them as Remi requested. It includes my fix for Tomcat.

They are packaged for Trusty from the following commit:
https://github.com/borisroman/cloudstack/commit/20134ccf31e1b0114876eacf1fa081322ce9a6ac

https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/trusty/fix/cloudstack-agent_4.6.0_all.deb
https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/trusty/fix/cloudstack-cli_4.6.0_all.deb
https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/trusty/fix/cloudstack-common_4.6.0_all.deb
https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/trusty/fix/cloudstack-docs_4.6.0_all.deb
https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/trusty/fix/cloudstack-management_4.6.0_all.deb
https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/trusty/fix/cloudstack-usage_4.6.0_all.deb

-- 

Met vriendelijke groet / Kind regards,

Boris Schrijver

PCextreme B.V.

http://www.pcextreme.nl/contact
Tel direct: +31 6 33784542

> On November 5, 2015 at 11:10 AM Boris Schrijver  wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi all!
> 
> I've made the DEB packages of the 4.6.0-RC20151104T1522 publicly available
> here:
> 
> https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/precise/cloudstack-agent_4.6.0_all.deb
> https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/precise/cloudstack-cli_4.6.0_all.deb
> https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/precise/cloudstack-common_4.6.0_all.deb
> https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/precise/cloudstack-docs_4.6.0_all.deb
> https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/precise/cloudstack-management_4.6.0_all.deb
> https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/precise/cloudstack-usage_4.6.0_all.deb
> https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/trusty/cloudstack-agent_4.6.0_all.deb
> https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/trusty/cloudstack-cli_4.6.0_all.deb
> https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/trusty/cloudstack-common_4.6.0_all.deb
> https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/trusty/cloudstack-docs_4.6.0_all.deb
> https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/trusty/cloudstack-management_4.6.0_all.deb
> https://cloudstack.o.auroraobjects.eu/trusty/cloudstack-usage_4.6.0_all.deb
> 
> -- 
> 
> Met vriendelijke groet / Kind regards,
> 
> Boris Schrijver
> 
> PCextreme B.V.
> 
> http://www.pcextreme.nl/contact
> Tel direct: +31 6 33784542

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9039: Fix paths for logging Ub...

[remibergsma]

Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1039#issuecomment-154405523
  
FYI: Started tests on this branch.


---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Boris Schrijver]

Same tomcat6 issue?

-- 

Met vriendelijke groet / Kind regards,

Boris Schrijver

PCextreme B.V.

http://www.pcextreme.nl/contact
Tel direct: +31 6 33784542

> On November 6, 2015 at 2:49 PM Paul Angus  wrote:
> 
> 
> Sorry guys.  CentOS 7 install is NOT fixed in 4.6.0-RC20151104T1522.
> 
> 
> Sorry had to fly out to client in Kenya, so not been able to work on it
> recently.
> 
> -1
> 
> [root@CentOS7ACSTest ~]# cloudstack-setup-management
> Starting to configure CloudStack Management Server:
> Configure Firewall ...[OK]
> Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed]
> Cannot find /etc/cloudstack/management/server-nonssl.xml or
> /etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-nonssl.conf, https enables failed
> Try to restore your system:
> Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
> Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Paul Angus
> VP Technology/Cloud Architect
> S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447711418784 | T: CloudyAngus
> paul.an...@shapeblue.com
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:rberg...@schubergphilis.com]
> Sent: 06 November 2015 13:33
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> 
> Hi Raja,
> 
> Thanks for the report. Most of these seem test-case related. For any issue you
> doubt this, can you please verify them manually?
> 
> If it doesn’t work, please file a Jira issue (with details and stept) and set
> it to critical. It will then show up on the list of issues and we can discuss
> how to proceed.
> 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12332940 (requires login)
> 
> 
> Regards,
> Remi
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 06/11/15 12:07, "Raja Pullela"  wrote:
> 
> >Here is the BVT report on the RC
> >KVM Basic – 98.6% , one test failed//test case issue KVM Adv – 96.3%,
> >four tests failed //couple due to VM deployment and couple due to test
> >case issue XS Basic – 97.2%, two tests failed//test case issues XS Adv
> >– 93.5%, seven tests failed //4 due to VM deployment and 3 due to test
> >case issues HyperV – 93.3%, seven tests failed Simulator – need to run
> >them… will report later today/tomorrow.
> >
> >
> >Failed test cases:
> >·
> >
> > integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcRemoteAccessVpn.test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
> >//failed due to VM deployment
> >·
> >
> > integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcSite2SiteVpn.test_vpc_site2site_vpn
> >//failed due to VM deployment
> >·
> >
> > integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces
> >//failed due to VM deployment
> >·
> >
> > integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80
> >//failed due to VM deployment
> >·
> >
> > integration.smoke.test_over_provisioning.TestUpdateOverProvision.test_UpdateStorageOverProvisioningFactor
> >//test case issue
> >·
> >
> > integration.smoke.test_vm_snapshots.TestSnapshots.test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot
> >//test case issue
> >· integration.smoke.test_iso.TestISO.test_07_list_default_iso //test
> >case issue
> >:setup  //test
> >case issue
> >
> >From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pull...@citrix.com]
> >Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:30 PM
> >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> >
> >
> >Here is the BVT report on the RC -
> >
> >[cid:image001.png@01D118B0.21037340]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com]
> >Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:19 PM
> >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> >
> >
> >
> >Thanks again, Lucian!
> >
> >
> >
> >I’m already working on 9015 and testing few things, hope to get it fixed
> >soon, but not for 4.6.0.
> >
> >
> >
> >If we kan keep the good work in terms of writing/executing tests - which will
> >help keeping Master stable - and also avoid merges that don’t follow the
> >rule(*), we can have a 4.6.1/4.7.0 (new features) within two month from now.
> >
> >
> >
> >So, let us all keep the great work concerning tests/quality/stability.
> >
> >
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Wilder
> >
> >
> >
> >* 2 LGTMs + tests (written/executed)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:49, Nux! > 
> >> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >
> >> Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:
> >
> >>
> >
> >> 9015 - it sounds somewhat serious, I'll try to test these days what
> >
> >> happens if one of the VRs crashes, that's when we'd need redundancy
> >> in
> >
> >> a more "real" scenario, if we could get this fixed before release
> >> it'd
> >
> >> be ideal, Remi should know more re correct procedure here
> >
> >>
> >
> >> 9035 - sounds like a non-issue to me, if I want to reset the password  and
> >> the backup router does what it's told, then I don't care it doesn't have
> >> the old passwords from the 

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Daan Hoogland]

Paul, By the looks of it it doesn't fail. It just doesn't install the non
ssl config from tomcat6. Does your management server install? I think your
output does NOT warrant a -1 as is!

On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 2:55 PM, Boris Schrijver  wrote:

> Same tomcat6 issue?
>
> --
>
> Met vriendelijke groet / Kind regards,
>
> Boris Schrijver
>
> PCextreme B.V.
>
> http://www.pcextreme.nl/contact
> Tel direct: +31 6 33784542
>
> > On November 6, 2015 at 2:49 PM Paul Angus 
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Sorry guys.  CentOS 7 install is NOT fixed in 4.6.0-RC20151104T1522.
> >
> >
> > Sorry had to fly out to client in Kenya, so not been able to work on it
> > recently.
> >
> > -1
> >
> > [root@CentOS7ACSTest ~]# cloudstack-setup-management
> > Starting to configure CloudStack Management Server:
> > Configure Firewall ...[OK]
> > Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed]
> > Cannot find /etc/cloudstack/management/server-nonssl.xml or
> > /etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-nonssl.conf, https enables failed
> > Try to restore your system:
> > Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
> > Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Paul Angus
> > VP Technology/Cloud Architect
> > S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447711418784 | T: CloudyAngus
> > paul.an...@shapeblue.com
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:rberg...@schubergphilis.com]
> > Sent: 06 November 2015 13:33
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> >
> > Hi Raja,
> >
> > Thanks for the report. Most of these seem test-case related. For any
> issue you
> > doubt this, can you please verify them manually?
> >
> > If it doesn’t work, please file a Jira issue (with details and stept)
> and set
> > it to critical. It will then show up on the list of issues and we can
> discuss
> > how to proceed.
> >
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12332940 (requires login)
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Remi
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 06/11/15 12:07, "Raja Pullela"  wrote:
> >
> > >Here is the BVT report on the RC
> > >KVM Basic – 98.6% , one test failed//test case issue KVM Adv – 96.3%,
> > >four tests failed //couple due to VM deployment and couple due to test
> > >case issue XS Basic – 97.2%, two tests failed//test case issues XS Adv
> > >– 93.5%, seven tests failed //4 due to VM deployment and 3 due to test
> > >case issues HyperV – 93.3%, seven tests failed Simulator – need to run
> > >them… will report later today/tomorrow.
> > >
> > >
> > >Failed test cases:
> > >·
> > >
> integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcRemoteAccessVpn.test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
> > >//failed due to VM deployment
> > >·
> > >
> integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcSite2SiteVpn.test_vpc_site2site_vpn
> > >//failed due to VM deployment
> > >·
> > >
> integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces
> > >//failed due to VM deployment
> > >·
> > >
> integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80
> > >//failed due to VM deployment
> > >·
> > >
> integration.smoke.test_over_provisioning.TestUpdateOverProvision.test_UpdateStorageOverProvisioningFactor
> > >//test case issue
> > >·
> > >
> integration.smoke.test_vm_snapshots.TestSnapshots.test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot
> > >//test case issue
> > >· integration.smoke.test_iso.TestISO.test_07_list_default_iso
> //test
> > >case issue
> > >:setup  //test
> > >case issue
> > >
> > >From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pull...@citrix.com]
> > >Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:30 PM
> > >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > >Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> > >
> > >
> > >Here is the BVT report on the RC -
> > >
> > >[cid:image001.png@01D118B0.21037340]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >-Original Message-
> > >From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com]
> > >Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:19 PM
> > >To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > >Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Thanks again, Lucian!
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >I’m already working on 9015 and testing few things, hope to get it fixed
> > >soon, but not for 4.6.0.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >If we kan keep the good work in terms of writing/executing tests -
> which will
> > >help keeping Master stable - and also avoid merges that don’t follow the
> > >rule(*), we can have a 4.6.1/4.7.0 (new features) within two month from
> now.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >So, let us all keep the great work concerning tests/quality/stability.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Cheers,
> > >
> > >Wilder
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >* 2 LGTMs + tests (written/executed)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:49, Nux! >
> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> > >> Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:
> > >
> > >>
> > >
> 

RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Raja Pullela]

Hi Sebastien, 

resent the report... 
Test case issues - we can ignore.  we will should fix them anyways.  
VM Deployment issues - analyzing them... probably not blockers for now until we 
find the root cause.  

best,
Raja

-Original Message-
From: Sebastien Goasguen [mailto:run...@gmail.com] 
Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:33 PM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

Thanks Raja,

Attachments get striped on this mailing list, so I can’t see wha you seem to 
have attached.

Also it would be most helpful if you could comment on the errors that you 
report.
Do you consider them as blockers, are they related to open issues, shall we 
discard them ?



> On Nov 6, 2015, at 12:00 PM, Raja Pullela  wrote:
> 
> Here is the BVT report on the RC -
> 
>  
> Failed test cases:
> · 
> integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcRemoteAccessVpn.test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
>  //failed due to VM deployment
> · 
> integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcSite2SiteVpn.test_vpc_site2site_vpn 
> //failed due to VM deployment
> · 
> integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces
>  //failed due to VM deployment
> · 
> integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80//failed
>  due to VM deployment
> ·
> integration.smoke.test_over_provisioning.TestUpdateOverProvision.test_UpdateStorageOverProvisioningFactor
>  //test case issue
> · 
> integration.smoke.test_vm_snapshots.TestSnapshots.test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot
>  //test case issue
> · integration.smoke.test_iso.TestISO.test_07_list_default_iso //test 
> case issue
> :setup  //test 
> case issue
>  
> -Original Message-
> From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:19 PM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>  
> Thanks again, Lucian!
>  
> I’m already working on 9015 and testing few things, hope to get it fixed 
> soon, but not for 4.6.0.
>  
> If we kan keep the good work in terms of writing/executing tests - which will 
> help keeping Master stable - and also avoid merges that don’t follow the 
> rule(*), we can have a 4.6.1/4.7.0 (new features) within two month from now.
>  
> So, let us all keep the great work concerning tests/quality/stability.
>  
> Cheers,
> Wilder
>  
> * 2 LGTMs + tests (written/executed)
>  
>  
> > On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:49, Nux!  wrote:
> > 
> > Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:
> > 
> > 9015 - it sounds somewhat serious, I'll try to test these days what 
> > happens if one of the VRs crashes, that's when we'd need redundancy 
> > in a more "real" scenario, if we could get this fixed before release 
> > it'd be ideal, Remi should know more re correct procedure here
> > 
> > 9035 - sounds like a non-issue to me, if I want to reset the password  and 
> > the backup router does what it's told, then I don't care it doesn't have 
> > the old passwords from the other router cached. This could impact instance 
> > deployments or passwd resets right in the time BACKUP becomes MASTER. How 
> > long is this generally?
> > 
> > Lucian
> > 
> > --
> > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> > 
> > Nux!
> > www.nux.ro
> > 
> > - Original Message -
> >> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
> >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 09:29:56
> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> > 
> >> Thanks for the clear message, Lucian. I really appreciated that. :)
> >> 
> >> It’s about the Redundant VPC, not the single one - which is working 
> >> pretty fine, btw!
> >> 
> >> Open issues are:
> >> 
> >> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9015
> >> * https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9035
> >> 
> >> And I have to write tests to cover Private Gateway and S2S VPN for 
> >> Redundant VPC.
> >> 
> >> All the rest working fine, as you have seen in my report.
> >> 
> >> Cheers,
> >> Wilder
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:19, Nux! > 
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >> Well, in my non-coder opinion, we should not deliver broken 
> >> software, however we saw in the past fixing it all delayed release 
> >> considerably.
> >> Now, how broken is that VPC? :)
> >> 
> >> --
> >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >> 
> >> Nux!
> >> www.nux.ro
> >> 
> >> - Original Message -
> >> From: "Wilder Rodrigues" 
> >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> >> Sent: Friday, 6 November, 2015 08:57:56
> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
> >> 
> >> I forgot to mention that for the failed rVPC test I followed the 
> >> same steps manually and it worked as expected.
> >> 
> >> In addition, I would like to hear from the 

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9042: VR: DHCP: fix missing DH...

[resmo]

GitHub user resmo opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1042

CLOUDSTACK-9042: VR: DHCP: fix missing DHCP host enties

in /etc/dhcpentries.txt we had:

02:00:1e:07:01:53,set:10_102_92_5,10.102.92.5,songlog-1,infinite
02:00:0b:a2:00:3d,set:10_102_92_234,10.102.92.234,log-1,infinite

This sed matched unexpectetly "songlog-1" as well when "log-1" was 
processed, resulting
missing dhcp entry for songlog-1.

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

$ git pull https://github.com/resmo/cloudstack CLOUDSTACK-9042

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1042.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

This closes #1042


commit baba68286faa89d83bfee7a7592f6392ff65e25d
Author: Rene Moser 
Date:   2015-11-06T11:25:10Z

CLOUDSTACK-9042: VR: DHCP: fix missing DHCP host enties

in /etc/dhcpentries.txt we had:

02:00:1e:07:01:53,set:10_102_92_5,10.102.92.5,songlog-1,infinite
02:00:0b:a2:00:3d,set:10_102_92_234,10.102.92.234,log-1,infinite

This sed matched unexpectetly "songlog-1" as well when "log-1" was 
processed, resulting
missing dhcp entry for songlog-1.




---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9042: VR: DHCP: fix missing DH...

[ustcweizhou]

Github user ustcweizhou commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1042#issuecomment-154398072
  
LGTM
btw, can you check other part except hostname in the file and fix them too?



---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---

Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0

[Wilder Rodrigues]

Based on Paul’s  logs, yes, it is due to the Tomcat6 packaging.

It’s a shame he is too busy to elaborate or read the messages we already sent 
about it.

+1 (binding)

Cheers,
Wilder


> On 06 Nov 2015, at 14:55, Boris Schrijver  wrote:
> 
> Same tomcat6 issue?
> 
> -- 
> 
> Met vriendelijke groet / Kind regards,
> 
> Boris Schrijver
> 
> PCextreme B.V.
> 
> http://www.pcextreme.nl/contact
> Tel direct: +31 6 33784542
> 
>> On November 6, 2015 at 2:49 PM Paul Angus  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Sorry guys.  CentOS 7 install is NOT fixed in 4.6.0-RC20151104T1522.
>> 
>> 
>> Sorry had to fly out to client in Kenya, so not been able to work on it
>> recently.
>> 
>> -1
>> 
>> [root@CentOS7ACSTest ~]# cloudstack-setup-management
>> Starting to configure CloudStack Management Server:
>> Configure Firewall ...[OK]
>> Configure CloudStack Management Server ...[Failed]
>> Cannot find /etc/cloudstack/management/server-nonssl.xml or
>> /etc/cloudstack/management/tomcat6-nonssl.conf, https enables failed
>> Try to restore your system:
>> Restore Firewall ...  [OK]
>> Restore CloudStack Management Server ...[OK]
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Paul Angus
>> VP Technology/Cloud Architect
>> S: +44 20 3603 0540 | M: +447711418784 | T: CloudyAngus
>> paul.an...@shapeblue.com
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:rberg...@schubergphilis.com]
>> Sent: 06 November 2015 13:33
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>> 
>> Hi Raja,
>> 
>> Thanks for the report. Most of these seem test-case related. For any issue 
>> you
>> doubt this, can you please verify them manually?
>> 
>> If it doesn’t work, please file a Jira issue (with details and stept) and set
>> it to critical. It will then show up on the list of issues and we can discuss
>> how to proceed.
>> 
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?filter=12332940 (requires login)
>> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Remi
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 06/11/15 12:07, "Raja Pullela"  wrote:
>> 
>>> Here is the BVT report on the RC
>>> KVM Basic – 98.6% , one test failed//test case issue KVM Adv – 96.3%,
>>> four tests failed //couple due to VM deployment and couple due to test
>>> case issue XS Basic – 97.2%, two tests failed//test case issues XS Adv
>>> – 93.5%, seven tests failed //4 due to VM deployment and 3 due to test
>>> case issues HyperV – 93.3%, seven tests failed Simulator – need to run
>>> them… will report later today/tomorrow.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Failed test cases:
>>> ·
>>>   
>>> integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcRemoteAccessVpn.test_vpc_remote_access_vpn
>>> //failed due to VM deployment
>>> ·
>>>   
>>> integration.smoke.test_vpc_vpn.TestVpcSite2SiteVpn.test_vpc_site2site_vpn
>>> //failed due to VM deployment
>>> ·
>>>   
>>> integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test02_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces
>>> //failed due to VM deployment
>>> ·
>>>   
>>> integration.smoke.test_internal_lb.TestInternalLb.test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80
>>> //failed due to VM deployment
>>> ·
>>>   
>>> integration.smoke.test_over_provisioning.TestUpdateOverProvision.test_UpdateStorageOverProvisioningFactor
>>> //test case issue
>>> ·
>>>   
>>> integration.smoke.test_vm_snapshots.TestSnapshots.test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot
>>> //test case issue
>>> · integration.smoke.test_iso.TestISO.test_07_list_default_iso //test
>>> case issue
>>> :setup  //test
>>> case issue
>>> 
>>> From: Raja Pullela [mailto:raja.pull...@citrix.com]
>>> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:30 PM
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Here is the BVT report on the RC -
>>> 
>>> [cid:image001.png@01D118B0.21037340]
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com]
>>> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2015 4:19 PM
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache CloudStack 4.6.0
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks again, Lucian!
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I’m already working on 9015 and testing few things, hope to get it fixed
>>> soon, but not for 4.6.0.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> If we kan keep the good work in terms of writing/executing tests - which 
>>> will
>>> help keeping Master stable - and also avoid merges that don’t follow the
>>> rule(*), we can have a 4.6.1/4.7.0 (new features) within two month from now.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> So, let us all keep the great work concerning tests/quality/stability.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> 
>>> Wilder
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> * 2 LGTMs + tests (written/executed)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On 06 Nov 2015, at 10:49, Nux! > 
 wrote:
>>> 
 
>>> 
 Well, IMHO the 2 issues are not big problems:
>>> 
 
>>> 
 9015 - it sounds somewhat serious, I'll try to test these days what
>>>