Re: [DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
Just as an FYI, we've dramatically increased Travis capacity. https://blogs.apache.org/infra/entry/apache_gains_additional_travis_ci On Thursday, April 30, 2015, Abhinandan Prateek abhinandan.prat...@shapeblue.com wrote: Yes, lot of sanity testing can be accomplished by the automated test suites that we already have. There are still lot of tests that can be run using the travis-CI, (need to see how many more without loading the travis system). Some of the companies including Shapeblue are already running most or all of the test cases. This means that the latest branches (4.5, 4.6) already have a level of sanity. At this stage we should define the amount of coverage that automation provides and also look at the areas where automation is failing, and work towards covering it. We need this as we continue to find issues that are not covered by automation. I agree that while releasing if issues are found then we fix them and also write tests so that these do not reoccur. -abhi On 30-Apr-2015, at 7:42 am, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us javascript:; wrote: The problem is really two fold. Cutting an RC isn't terribly time consuming, once you've done it a dozen times or so, it goes by pretty quickly. The problem is the time it takes to do any material testing; and that we don't have a way of telling what the status of a candidate is without doing lots of manual testing. We've had multiple cases of having enough binding votes for 4.5.x candidates only for someone to find problems. This leads me (and this could just be my perspective) to let an RC sit for a while - get folks to test it. My experience as a person voting is that rapid churn of RCs leads me to not even attempt to setup a testing environment, much less do any testing. I found that by the time I could get around to testing an RC vote had been cancelled and it had been rerolled, sometimes twice. I've said this before, and I'll toss it out again. I think we have to start 'trusting' the automated tests. We find lots of problems manually, but we don't improve the testing situation for those blocker issues that stopped us from releasing. I'm of the opinion we should release quickly, very quickly. But if we have to spend a week just looking for bugs, that will never fly. So - let the standard be automated tests - and if there's a problem, we create an automated test for it, and solve in a week or two. That will force us to live and die by automated tests. --David On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com javascript:; wrote: Hi Wilder - Thanks we’ll need all the ammo we have :) I’ve already done my testings wrt XS 6.2/6.5 and KVM qemu 2.0/2.1/2.2 so will test KVM 1.5 and VMware 5.5. Hi Daan - makes sense, we’re “so late with 4.5.1 that we need to focus on 4.6.0 to avoid delaying it. I’ve asked David regarding co-piloting the next 4.5.1 RC since he could be busy and I want to help with lifting some weights. I’m planning to do basic tests with VMware today, publish new systemvmtemplates tomorrow (I’m already done with KVM and Xen) and plan to cut a 4.5.1 RC on Monday and if we don’t hit any blocker or regressions ACS 4.5.1 should be released by the end of next week. On 29-Apr-2015, at 2:49 pm, Wilder Rodrigues wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com javascript:; wrote: Hi Rohit, I will join you in testing 4.5 form next week - just have to finish some stuff. My environments will be: * Xen 6.2/6.5 * KVM (qemu 1.5.3 and 2.1) Let’s rock! Cheers, Wilder On 28 Apr 2015, at 18:33, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com javascript:; wrote: Hi all, ### 4.5 Release Effort I’ve been exhaustively testing ACS 4.5 wrt Xen 6.2, Xen 6.5, KVM (qemu 2.0, 2.3) and I feel we’re pretty good but we need testing efforts and I want to help drive efforts to releasing ACS 4.5.1 -- if you’ve any issues that you would like to get fixed that are either regressions or blockers can you please share on this thread? If we don’t find any blockers or regressions let us invest in ACS 4.5 testing and release it soon. For other minor issues we can always fix them and release 4.5.2 etc if and when needed in future. Regarding my 4.5 testing - I’ve tested basic vm life cycle operations (deploy, start, stop, destroy/expunge, migrate to another host, migrate to another storage pool, deploy using iso) for all cases and found no issues; KVM with basic zone (with/without security groups, SG blockers were found and fixed) KVM with Adv zone (with/without security groups, both isolated network and VPC worked, networking issues were found and fixed) XenServer 6.2 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, no SG issues found) XenServer 6.5 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, SG blockers found and fixed) I found one issue that could be a blocker (if it’s not a hardware/env issue) --
Re: [DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Hi all, ### 4.5 Release Effort I’ve been exhaustively testing ACS 4.5 wrt Xen 6.2, Xen 6.5, KVM (qemu 2.0, 2.3) and I feel we’re pretty good but we need testing efforts and I want to help drive efforts to releasing ACS 4.5.1 -- if you’ve any issues that you would like to get fixed that are either regressions or blockers can you please share on this thread? If we don’t find any blockers or regressions let us invest in ACS 4.5 testing and release it soon. For other minor issues we can always fix them and release 4.5.2 etc if and when needed in future. Regarding my 4.5 testing - I’ve tested basic vm life cycle operations (deploy, start, stop, destroy/expunge, migrate to another host, migrate to another storage pool, deploy using iso) for all cases and found no issues; We're doing live testing with a system that is to go live soon(tm), using XenServer 6.5, advanced networks (using shared networks without SG primarily). We have hit a few bugs, but they are related to XenServer and/or hardware (host crashing when doing VM snapshot amongst other things). One bug I've found which drives me crazy is that, for some reason, the VR is versioned as 4.4.0 and needs to be upgraded. This only happens once in a while, and I have a hard time reproducing it. What drives me crazy is that 4.4.0 has never been installed so I have no idea why it has that version number, and upgrading doesn't work... It has been a few week since I updated the install, so it is closer to the current RC than it is to the 4.5 branch. I'll try to update it next week. -- Erik
Re: [DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
Hi Rohit, I will join you in testing 4.5 form next week - just have to finish some stuff. My environments will be: * Xen 6.2/6.5 * KVM (qemu 1.5.3 and 2.1) Let’s rock! Cheers, Wilder On 28 Apr 2015, at 18:33, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Hi all, ### 4.5 Release Effort I’ve been exhaustively testing ACS 4.5 wrt Xen 6.2, Xen 6.5, KVM (qemu 2.0, 2.3) and I feel we’re pretty good but we need testing efforts and I want to help drive efforts to releasing ACS 4.5.1 -- if you’ve any issues that you would like to get fixed that are either regressions or blockers can you please share on this thread? If we don’t find any blockers or regressions let us invest in ACS 4.5 testing and release it soon. For other minor issues we can always fix them and release 4.5.2 etc if and when needed in future. Regarding my 4.5 testing - I’ve tested basic vm life cycle operations (deploy, start, stop, destroy/expunge, migrate to another host, migrate to another storage pool, deploy using iso) for all cases and found no issues; KVM with basic zone (with/without security groups, SG blockers were found and fixed) KVM with Adv zone (with/without security groups, both isolated network and VPC worked, networking issues were found and fixed) XenServer 6.2 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, no SG issues found) XenServer 6.5 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, SG blockers found and fixed) I found one issue that could be a blocker (if it’s not a hardware/env issue) -- when using security groups in advance zone with a dedicated vlan id (say vlan://500), I was unable to access the VMs (CPVM, SSVM, VR or user vms) though all normal vm_life cycles seems to work. Though this worked for me when I used the vlan://untagged. I tried to add vlan id 500 to my local nics using vconfig but I still was n’t able to do access the CPVM or user VMs. I guess my understanding of vlans with security groups is limited, so if anyone knows about this feature or has used it - please help with some regression testing. I plan to continue testing this week with VMWare and fix any issues we find. ### Testing against Xen, KVM, VMWare etc. With a recent improvement to allow cpu features (such as vmx) on KVM hosts (https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commit/58cc569273905c50d089f9fd82fe80028b4e9775), it’s now possible to run KVM, ESX, XenServer, OVM3 (LXC, and hopefully others) on KVM (in case of ESX a patched qemu would be needed: http://people.apache.org/~bhaisaab/qemu/). Such a (ansible based) tool aims to be reproduce such an environment for anyone and serve as a developer kit (not to be confused with the DevCloud appliance, will share more details of the developer kit later) and as an infrastructure to run integration testing suite we have now. This would allow us to build/test/run CloudStack against various nested-virtualized hosts running as guests on KVM, using CloudStack. Meanwhile, Abhi is focusing on existing (integration) tests and has increased the number of TravisCI tests: https://travis-ci.org/apache/cloudstack/builds/60365947 Our goal with these efforts is to (1) have a developer kit that a developer can have locally to build/test/develop CloudStack, (2) scale it up for bigger baremetal servers to run long running integration tests and have a better QA automation. Regards, Rohit Yadav Software Architect, ShapeBlue M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services IaaS Cloud Design Buildhttp://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build// CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment frameworkhttp://shapeblue.com/csforge/ CloudStack Consultinghttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/ CloudStack Software Engineeringhttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/ CloudStack Infrastructure Supporthttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/ CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courseshttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/ 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
Re: [DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
Rohit, @SBP we are busy basing our attempt at CD on 4.4. As Wilder said we will spend some time on testing 4.5 but hopefully we will go to master/4.6 soon. @David: will you make a new RC? (please please, pretty please. We made a bugfix in the plane to Austin we want in) Op wo 29 apr. 2015 om 15:06 schreef Erik Weber terbol...@gmail.com: On Tue, Apr 28, 2015 at 6:33 PM, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Hi all, ### 4.5 Release Effort I’ve been exhaustively testing ACS 4.5 wrt Xen 6.2, Xen 6.5, KVM (qemu 2.0, 2.3) and I feel we’re pretty good but we need testing efforts and I want to help drive efforts to releasing ACS 4.5.1 -- if you’ve any issues that you would like to get fixed that are either regressions or blockers can you please share on this thread? If we don’t find any blockers or regressions let us invest in ACS 4.5 testing and release it soon. For other minor issues we can always fix them and release 4.5.2 etc if and when needed in future. Regarding my 4.5 testing - I’ve tested basic vm life cycle operations (deploy, start, stop, destroy/expunge, migrate to another host, migrate to another storage pool, deploy using iso) for all cases and found no issues; We're doing live testing with a system that is to go live soon(tm), using XenServer 6.5, advanced networks (using shared networks without SG primarily). We have hit a few bugs, but they are related to XenServer and/or hardware (host crashing when doing VM snapshot amongst other things). One bug I've found which drives me crazy is that, for some reason, the VR is versioned as 4.4.0 and needs to be upgraded. This only happens once in a while, and I have a hard time reproducing it. What drives me crazy is that 4.4.0 has never been installed so I have no idea why it has that version number, and upgrading doesn't work... It has been a few week since I updated the install, so it is closer to the current RC than it is to the 4.5 branch. I'll try to update it next week. -- Erik
Re: [DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
Hi Erik, What you’re reporting is a strange behaviour indeed. I still suspect it is likely an environment issue as I’ve been testing 4.5 for last few months now and have not hit anything like this. Can you try to shutdown the mgmt server (and agent if it’s KVM) and then pre-seed a 4.5 systemvm template again using -F (to cleanup old template) like this: /usr/share/cloudstack-common/scripts/storage/secondary/cloud-install-sys-tmplt \ -m /export/secondary -f 4.5 file here -h hypervisor etc -F The idea here is to force remove the template and then try to provision new VRs using that and confirm if you still reproduce this issue? It’s possible the host has cached an old template but I’ve less idea regarding the storage component and how it works for various hypervisors. Regards. On 29-Apr-2015, at 5:04 pm, Erik Weber terbol...@gmail.com wrote: Den onsdag 29. april 2015 skrev Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com følgende: Hi Erik, On 29-Apr-2015, at 4:25 pm, Erik Weber terbol...@gmail.com javascript:; wrote: Then it should always happen, no? It is sporadic, currently i have four routers happily being 4.5, but one that is 4.4. If you remove the VR which is 4.4, please check if the new one that gets created is 4.5 or still 4.4? It varies, sometimes 4.5, sometimes 4.4. Was this setup a fresh install or an upgrade from 4.4? It’s likely that something went wrong in case it was an upgrade. Perhaps, there are multiple secondary storages, in which case it could happen that one of them has an old template pre-seeded (The template copying across zones could have failed). Fresh install, no components has been used before. Regards. Erik Den onsdag 29. april 2015 skrev Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com javascript:; følgende: Hi Erik, On 29-Apr-2015, at 3:04 pm, Erik Weber terbol...@gmail.com javascript:; javascript:; wrote: One bug I've found which drives me crazy is that, for some reason, the VR is versioned as 4.4.0 and needs to be upgraded. This only happens once in a while, and I have a hard time reproducing it. What drives me crazy is that 4.4.0 has never been installed so I have no idea why it has that version number, and upgrading doesn't work... It has been a few week since I updated the install, so it is closer to the current RC than it is to the 4.5 branch. I'll try to update it next week. The VR/systemvm version is taken from /etc/cloudstack-release file. It is likely you were using a 4.4 systemvm template (I’ve hit such issues in past when testing 4.4 with 4.5 etc). Regards, Rohit Yadav Software Architect, ShapeBlue M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com javascript:; javascript:; Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services IaaS Cloud Design Build http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build// CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment frameworkhttp://shapeblue.com/csforge/ CloudStack Consultinghttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/ CloudStack Software Engineering http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/ CloudStack Infrastructure Support http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/ CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/ 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. Regards, Rohit Yadav Software Architect, ShapeBlue M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com javascript:; Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services IaaS Cloud Design Build http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build// CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment frameworkhttp://shapeblue.com/csforge/ CloudStack Consultinghttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/ CloudStack Software Engineering http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/ CloudStack Infrastructure Support http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/ CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses
Re: [DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
Hi Erik, On 29-Apr-2015, at 3:04 pm, Erik Weber terbol...@gmail.com wrote: One bug I've found which drives me crazy is that, for some reason, the VR is versioned as 4.4.0 and needs to be upgraded. This only happens once in a while, and I have a hard time reproducing it. What drives me crazy is that 4.4.0 has never been installed so I have no idea why it has that version number, and upgrading doesn't work... It has been a few week since I updated the install, so it is closer to the current RC than it is to the 4.5 branch. I'll try to update it next week. The VR/systemvm version is taken from /etc/cloudstack-release file. It is likely you were using a 4.4 systemvm template (I’ve hit such issues in past when testing 4.4 with 4.5 etc). Regards, Rohit Yadav Software Architect, ShapeBlue M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services IaaS Cloud Design Buildhttp://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build// CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment frameworkhttp://shapeblue.com/csforge/ CloudStack Consultinghttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/ CloudStack Software Engineeringhttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/ CloudStack Infrastructure Supporthttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/ CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courseshttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/ 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: [DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
Hi Wilder - Thanks we’ll need all the ammo we have :) I’ve already done my testings wrt XS 6.2/6.5 and KVM qemu 2.0/2.1/2.2 so will test KVM 1.5 and VMware 5.5. Hi Daan - makes sense, we’re “so late with 4.5.1 that we need to focus on 4.6.0 to avoid delaying it. I’ve asked David regarding co-piloting the next 4.5.1 RC since he could be busy and I want to help with lifting some weights. I’m planning to do basic tests with VMware today, publish new systemvmtemplates tomorrow (I’m already done with KVM and Xen) and plan to cut a 4.5.1 RC on Monday and if we don’t hit any blocker or regressions ACS 4.5.1 should be released by the end of next week. On 29-Apr-2015, at 2:49 pm, Wilder Rodrigues wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com wrote: Hi Rohit, I will join you in testing 4.5 form next week - just have to finish some stuff. My environments will be: * Xen 6.2/6.5 * KVM (qemu 1.5.3 and 2.1) Let’s rock! Cheers, Wilder On 28 Apr 2015, at 18:33, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Hi all, ### 4.5 Release Effort I’ve been exhaustively testing ACS 4.5 wrt Xen 6.2, Xen 6.5, KVM (qemu 2.0, 2.3) and I feel we’re pretty good but we need testing efforts and I want to help drive efforts to releasing ACS 4.5.1 -- if you’ve any issues that you would like to get fixed that are either regressions or blockers can you please share on this thread? If we don’t find any blockers or regressions let us invest in ACS 4.5 testing and release it soon. For other minor issues we can always fix them and release 4.5.2 etc if and when needed in future. Regarding my 4.5 testing - I’ve tested basic vm life cycle operations (deploy, start, stop, destroy/expunge, migrate to another host, migrate to another storage pool, deploy using iso) for all cases and found no issues; KVM with basic zone (with/without security groups, SG blockers were found and fixed) KVM with Adv zone (with/without security groups, both isolated network and VPC worked, networking issues were found and fixed) XenServer 6.2 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, no SG issues found) XenServer 6.5 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, SG blockers found and fixed) I found one issue that could be a blocker (if it’s not a hardware/env issue) -- when using security groups in advance zone with a dedicated vlan id (say vlan://500), I was unable to access the VMs (CPVM, SSVM, VR or user vms) though all normal vm_life cycles seems to work. Though this worked for me when I used the vlan://untagged. I tried to add vlan id 500 to my local nics using vconfig but I still was n’t able to do access the CPVM or user VMs. I guess my understanding of vlans with security groups is limited, so if anyone knows about this feature or has used it - please help with some regression testing. I plan to continue testing this week with VMWare and fix any issues we find. ### Testing against Xen, KVM, VMWare etc. With a recent improvement to allow cpu features (such as vmx) on KVM hosts (https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commit/58cc569273905c50d089f9fd82fe80028b4e9775), it’s now possible to run KVM, ESX, XenServer, OVM3 (LXC, and hopefully others) on KVM (in case of ESX a patched qemu would be needed: http://people.apache.org/~bhaisaab/qemu/). Such a (ansible based) tool aims to be reproduce such an environment for anyone and serve as a developer kit (not to be confused with the DevCloud appliance, will share more details of the developer kit later) and as an infrastructure to run integration testing suite we have now. This would allow us to build/test/run CloudStack against various nested-virtualized hosts running as guests on KVM, using CloudStack. Meanwhile, Abhi is focusing on existing (integration) tests and has increased the number of TravisCI tests: https://travis-ci.org/apache/cloudstack/builds/60365947 Our goal with these efforts is to (1) have a developer kit that a developer can have locally to build/test/develop CloudStack, (2) scale it up for bigger baremetal servers to run long running integration tests and have a better QA automation. Regards, Rohit Yadav Software Architect, ShapeBlue M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services IaaS Cloud Design Buildhttp://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build// CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment frameworkhttp://shapeblue.com/csforge/ CloudStack Consultinghttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/ CloudStack Software Engineeringhttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/ CloudStack Infrastructure Supporthttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/ CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courseshttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/ This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the
Re: [DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
Then it should always happen, no? It is sporadic, currently i have four routers happily being 4.5, but one that is 4.4. Erik Den onsdag 29. april 2015 skrev Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com følgende: Hi Erik, On 29-Apr-2015, at 3:04 pm, Erik Weber terbol...@gmail.com javascript:; wrote: One bug I've found which drives me crazy is that, for some reason, the VR is versioned as 4.4.0 and needs to be upgraded. This only happens once in a while, and I have a hard time reproducing it. What drives me crazy is that 4.4.0 has never been installed so I have no idea why it has that version number, and upgrading doesn't work... It has been a few week since I updated the install, so it is closer to the current RC than it is to the 4.5 branch. I'll try to update it next week. The VR/systemvm version is taken from /etc/cloudstack-release file. It is likely you were using a 4.4 systemvm template (I’ve hit such issues in past when testing 4.4 with 4.5 etc). Regards, Rohit Yadav Software Architect, ShapeBlue M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com javascript:; Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services IaaS Cloud Design Build http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build// CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment frameworkhttp://shapeblue.com/csforge/ CloudStack Consultinghttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/ CloudStack Software Engineering http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/ CloudStack Infrastructure Support http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/ CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/ 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: [DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
The problem is really two fold. Cutting an RC isn't terribly time consuming, once you've done it a dozen times or so, it goes by pretty quickly. The problem is the time it takes to do any material testing; and that we don't have a way of telling what the status of a candidate is without doing lots of manual testing. We've had multiple cases of having enough binding votes for 4.5.x candidates only for someone to find problems. This leads me (and this could just be my perspective) to let an RC sit for a while - get folks to test it. My experience as a person voting is that rapid churn of RCs leads me to not even attempt to setup a testing environment, much less do any testing. I found that by the time I could get around to testing an RC vote had been cancelled and it had been rerolled, sometimes twice. I've said this before, and I'll toss it out again. I think we have to start 'trusting' the automated tests. We find lots of problems manually, but we don't improve the testing situation for those blocker issues that stopped us from releasing. I'm of the opinion we should release quickly, very quickly. But if we have to spend a week just looking for bugs, that will never fly. So - let the standard be automated tests - and if there's a problem, we create an automated test for it, and solve in a week or two. That will force us to live and die by automated tests. --David On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Hi Wilder - Thanks we’ll need all the ammo we have :) I’ve already done my testings wrt XS 6.2/6.5 and KVM qemu 2.0/2.1/2.2 so will test KVM 1.5 and VMware 5.5. Hi Daan - makes sense, we’re “so late with 4.5.1 that we need to focus on 4.6.0 to avoid delaying it. I’ve asked David regarding co-piloting the next 4.5.1 RC since he could be busy and I want to help with lifting some weights. I’m planning to do basic tests with VMware today, publish new systemvmtemplates tomorrow (I’m already done with KVM and Xen) and plan to cut a 4.5.1 RC on Monday and if we don’t hit any blocker or regressions ACS 4.5.1 should be released by the end of next week. On 29-Apr-2015, at 2:49 pm, Wilder Rodrigues wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com wrote: Hi Rohit, I will join you in testing 4.5 form next week - just have to finish some stuff. My environments will be: * Xen 6.2/6.5 * KVM (qemu 1.5.3 and 2.1) Let’s rock! Cheers, Wilder On 28 Apr 2015, at 18:33, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Hi all, ### 4.5 Release Effort I’ve been exhaustively testing ACS 4.5 wrt Xen 6.2, Xen 6.5, KVM (qemu 2.0, 2.3) and I feel we’re pretty good but we need testing efforts and I want to help drive efforts to releasing ACS 4.5.1 -- if you’ve any issues that you would like to get fixed that are either regressions or blockers can you please share on this thread? If we don’t find any blockers or regressions let us invest in ACS 4.5 testing and release it soon. For other minor issues we can always fix them and release 4.5.2 etc if and when needed in future. Regarding my 4.5 testing - I’ve tested basic vm life cycle operations (deploy, start, stop, destroy/expunge, migrate to another host, migrate to another storage pool, deploy using iso) for all cases and found no issues; KVM with basic zone (with/without security groups, SG blockers were found and fixed) KVM with Adv zone (with/without security groups, both isolated network and VPC worked, networking issues were found and fixed) XenServer 6.2 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, no SG issues found) XenServer 6.5 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, SG blockers found and fixed) I found one issue that could be a blocker (if it’s not a hardware/env issue) -- when using security groups in advance zone with a dedicated vlan id (say vlan://500), I was unable to access the VMs (CPVM, SSVM, VR or user vms) though all normal vm_life cycles seems to work. Though this worked for me when I used the vlan://untagged. I tried to add vlan id 500 to my local nics using vconfig but I still was n’t able to do access the CPVM or user VMs. I guess my understanding of vlans with security groups is limited, so if anyone knows about this feature or has used it - please help with some regression testing. I plan to continue testing this week with VMWare and fix any issues we find. ### Testing against Xen, KVM, VMWare etc. With a recent improvement to allow cpu features (such as vmx) on KVM hosts (https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commit/58cc569273905c50d089f9fd82fe80028b4e9775), it’s now possible to run KVM, ESX, XenServer, OVM3 (LXC, and hopefully others) on KVM (in case of ESX a patched qemu would be needed: http://people.apache.org/~bhaisaab/qemu/). Such a (ansible based) tool aims to be reproduce such an environment for anyone and serve as a developer kit (not to be confused with the DevCloud appliance, will share more
Re: [DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
Yes, lot of sanity testing can be accomplished by the automated test suites that we already have. There are still lot of tests that can be run using the travis-CI, (need to see how many more without loading the travis system). Some of the companies including Shapeblue are already running most or all of the test cases. This means that the latest branches (4.5, 4.6) already have a level of sanity. At this stage we should define the amount of coverage that automation provides and also look at the areas where automation is failing, and work towards covering it. We need this as we continue to find issues that are not covered by automation. I agree that while releasing if issues are found then we fix them and also write tests so that these do not reoccur. -abhi On 30-Apr-2015, at 7:42 am, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote: The problem is really two fold. Cutting an RC isn't terribly time consuming, once you've done it a dozen times or so, it goes by pretty quickly. The problem is the time it takes to do any material testing; and that we don't have a way of telling what the status of a candidate is without doing lots of manual testing. We've had multiple cases of having enough binding votes for 4.5.x candidates only for someone to find problems. This leads me (and this could just be my perspective) to let an RC sit for a while - get folks to test it. My experience as a person voting is that rapid churn of RCs leads me to not even attempt to setup a testing environment, much less do any testing. I found that by the time I could get around to testing an RC vote had been cancelled and it had been rerolled, sometimes twice. I've said this before, and I'll toss it out again. I think we have to start 'trusting' the automated tests. We find lots of problems manually, but we don't improve the testing situation for those blocker issues that stopped us from releasing. I'm of the opinion we should release quickly, very quickly. But if we have to spend a week just looking for bugs, that will never fly. So - let the standard be automated tests - and if there's a problem, we create an automated test for it, and solve in a week or two. That will force us to live and die by automated tests. --David On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Hi Wilder - Thanks we’ll need all the ammo we have :) I’ve already done my testings wrt XS 6.2/6.5 and KVM qemu 2.0/2.1/2.2 so will test KVM 1.5 and VMware 5.5. Hi Daan - makes sense, we’re “so late with 4.5.1 that we need to focus on 4.6.0 to avoid delaying it. I’ve asked David regarding co-piloting the next 4.5.1 RC since he could be busy and I want to help with lifting some weights. I’m planning to do basic tests with VMware today, publish new systemvmtemplates tomorrow (I’m already done with KVM and Xen) and plan to cut a 4.5.1 RC on Monday and if we don’t hit any blocker or regressions ACS 4.5.1 should be released by the end of next week. On 29-Apr-2015, at 2:49 pm, Wilder Rodrigues wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com wrote: Hi Rohit, I will join you in testing 4.5 form next week - just have to finish some stuff. My environments will be: * Xen 6.2/6.5 * KVM (qemu 1.5.3 and 2.1) Let’s rock! Cheers, Wilder On 28 Apr 2015, at 18:33, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Hi all, ### 4.5 Release Effort I’ve been exhaustively testing ACS 4.5 wrt Xen 6.2, Xen 6.5, KVM (qemu 2.0, 2.3) and I feel we’re pretty good but we need testing efforts and I want to help drive efforts to releasing ACS 4.5.1 -- if you’ve any issues that you would like to get fixed that are either regressions or blockers can you please share on this thread? If we don’t find any blockers or regressions let us invest in ACS 4.5 testing and release it soon. For other minor issues we can always fix them and release 4.5.2 etc if and when needed in future. Regarding my 4.5 testing - I’ve tested basic vm life cycle operations (deploy, start, stop, destroy/expunge, migrate to another host, migrate to another storage pool, deploy using iso) for all cases and found no issues; KVM with basic zone (with/without security groups, SG blockers were found and fixed) KVM with Adv zone (with/without security groups, both isolated network and VPC worked, networking issues were found and fixed) XenServer 6.2 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, no SG issues found) XenServer 6.5 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, SG blockers found and fixed) I found one issue that could be a blocker (if it’s not a hardware/env issue) -- when using security groups in advance zone with a dedicated vlan id (say vlan://500), I was unable to access the VMs (CPVM, SSVM, VR or user vms) though all normal vm_life cycles seems to work. Though this worked for me when I used the vlan://untagged. I tried to add vlan id 500 to my local nics using vconfig but I
Re: [DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
+1 Totally agree and willing to help make it happen! Sent from my iPhone On 30 Apr 2015, at 04:12, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote: The problem is really two fold. Cutting an RC isn't terribly time consuming, once you've done it a dozen times or so, it goes by pretty quickly. The problem is the time it takes to do any material testing; and that we don't have a way of telling what the status of a candidate is without doing lots of manual testing. We've had multiple cases of having enough binding votes for 4.5.x candidates only for someone to find problems. This leads me (and this could just be my perspective) to let an RC sit for a while - get folks to test it. My experience as a person voting is that rapid churn of RCs leads me to not even attempt to setup a testing environment, much less do any testing. I found that by the time I could get around to testing an RC vote had been cancelled and it had been rerolled, sometimes twice. I've said this before, and I'll toss it out again. I think we have to start 'trusting' the automated tests. We find lots of problems manually, but we don't improve the testing situation for those blocker issues that stopped us from releasing. I'm of the opinion we should release quickly, very quickly. But if we have to spend a week just looking for bugs, that will never fly. So - let the standard be automated tests - and if there's a problem, we create an automated test for it, and solve in a week or two. That will force us to live and die by automated tests. --David On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Hi Wilder - Thanks we’ll need all the ammo we have :) I’ve already done my testings wrt XS 6.2/6.5 and KVM qemu 2.0/2.1/2.2 so will test KVM 1.5 and VMware 5.5. Hi Daan - makes sense, we’re “so late with 4.5.1 that we need to focus on 4.6.0 to avoid delaying it. I’ve asked David regarding co-piloting the next 4.5.1 RC since he could be busy and I want to help with lifting some weights. I’m planning to do basic tests with VMware today, publish new systemvmtemplates tomorrow (I’m already done with KVM and Xen) and plan to cut a 4.5.1 RC on Monday and if we don’t hit any blocker or regressions ACS 4.5.1 should be released by the end of next week. On 29-Apr-2015, at 2:49 pm, Wilder Rodrigues wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com wrote: Hi Rohit, I will join you in testing 4.5 form next week - just have to finish some stuff. My environments will be: * Xen 6.2/6.5 * KVM (qemu 1.5.3 and 2.1) Let’s rock! Cheers, Wilder On 28 Apr 2015, at 18:33, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Hi all, ### 4.5 Release Effort I’ve been exhaustively testing ACS 4.5 wrt Xen 6.2, Xen 6.5, KVM (qemu 2.0, 2.3) and I feel we’re pretty good but we need testing efforts and I want to help drive efforts to releasing ACS 4.5.1 -- if you’ve any issues that you would like to get fixed that are either regressions or blockers can you please share on this thread? If we don’t find any blockers or regressions let us invest in ACS 4.5 testing and release it soon. For other minor issues we can always fix them and release 4.5.2 etc if and when needed in future. Regarding my 4.5 testing - I’ve tested basic vm life cycle operations (deploy, start, stop, destroy/expunge, migrate to another host, migrate to another storage pool, deploy using iso) for all cases and found no issues; KVM with basic zone (with/without security groups, SG blockers were found and fixed) KVM with Adv zone (with/without security groups, both isolated network and VPC worked, networking issues were found and fixed) XenServer 6.2 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, no SG issues found) XenServer 6.5 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, SG blockers found and fixed) I found one issue that could be a blocker (if it’s not a hardware/env issue) -- when using security groups in advance zone with a dedicated vlan id (say vlan://500), I was unable to access the VMs (CPVM, SSVM, VR or user vms) though all normal vm_life cycles seems to work. Though this worked for me when I used the vlan://untagged. I tried to add vlan id 500 to my local nics using vconfig but I still was n’t able to do access the CPVM or user VMs. I guess my understanding of vlans with security groups is limited, so if anyone knows about this feature or has used it - please help with some regression testing. I plan to continue testing this week with VMWare and fix any issues we find. ### Testing against Xen, KVM, VMWare etc. With a recent improvement to allow cpu features (such as vmx) on KVM hosts (https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commit/58cc569273905c50d089f9fd82fe80028b4e9775), it’s now possible to run KVM, ESX, XenServer, OVM3 (LXC, and hopefully others) on KVM (in case of ESX a patched qemu would be needed:
Re: [DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
I agree that we should be relying on automated tests. It's too hit or miss (not to mention slow) when we put so much weight on semi random testing. On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 8:12 PM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote: The problem is really two fold. Cutting an RC isn't terribly time consuming, once you've done it a dozen times or so, it goes by pretty quickly. The problem is the time it takes to do any material testing; and that we don't have a way of telling what the status of a candidate is without doing lots of manual testing. We've had multiple cases of having enough binding votes for 4.5.x candidates only for someone to find problems. This leads me (and this could just be my perspective) to let an RC sit for a while - get folks to test it. My experience as a person voting is that rapid churn of RCs leads me to not even attempt to setup a testing environment, much less do any testing. I found that by the time I could get around to testing an RC vote had been cancelled and it had been rerolled, sometimes twice. I've said this before, and I'll toss it out again. I think we have to start 'trusting' the automated tests. We find lots of problems manually, but we don't improve the testing situation for those blocker issues that stopped us from releasing. I'm of the opinion we should release quickly, very quickly. But if we have to spend a week just looking for bugs, that will never fly. So - let the standard be automated tests - and if there's a problem, we create an automated test for it, and solve in a week or two. That will force us to live and die by automated tests. --David On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Hi Wilder - Thanks we’ll need all the ammo we have :) I’ve already done my testings wrt XS 6.2/6.5 and KVM qemu 2.0/2.1/2.2 so will test KVM 1.5 and VMware 5.5. Hi Daan - makes sense, we’re “so late with 4.5.1 that we need to focus on 4.6.0 to avoid delaying it. I’ve asked David regarding co-piloting the next 4.5.1 RC since he could be busy and I want to help with lifting some weights. I’m planning to do basic tests with VMware today, publish new systemvmtemplates tomorrow (I’m already done with KVM and Xen) and plan to cut a 4.5.1 RC on Monday and if we don’t hit any blocker or regressions ACS 4.5.1 should be released by the end of next week. On 29-Apr-2015, at 2:49 pm, Wilder Rodrigues wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com wrote: Hi Rohit, I will join you in testing 4.5 form next week - just have to finish some stuff. My environments will be: * Xen 6.2/6.5 * KVM (qemu 1.5.3 and 2.1) Let’s rock! Cheers, Wilder On 28 Apr 2015, at 18:33, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Hi all, ### 4.5 Release Effort I’ve been exhaustively testing ACS 4.5 wrt Xen 6.2, Xen 6.5, KVM (qemu 2.0, 2.3) and I feel we’re pretty good but we need testing efforts and I want to help drive efforts to releasing ACS 4.5.1 -- if you’ve any issues that you would like to get fixed that are either regressions or blockers can you please share on this thread? If we don’t find any blockers or regressions let us invest in ACS 4.5 testing and release it soon. For other minor issues we can always fix them and release 4.5.2 etc if and when needed in future. Regarding my 4.5 testing - I’ve tested basic vm life cycle operations (deploy, start, stop, destroy/expunge, migrate to another host, migrate to another storage pool, deploy using iso) for all cases and found no issues; KVM with basic zone (with/without security groups, SG blockers were found and fixed) KVM with Adv zone (with/without security groups, both isolated network and VPC worked, networking issues were found and fixed) XenServer 6.2 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, no SG issues found) XenServer 6.5 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, SG blockers found and fixed) I found one issue that could be a blocker (if it’s not a hardware/env issue) -- when using security groups in advance zone with a dedicated vlan id (say vlan://500), I was unable to access the VMs (CPVM, SSVM, VR or user vms) though all normal vm_life cycles seems to work. Though this worked for me when I used the vlan://untagged. I tried to add vlan id 500 to my local nics using vconfig but I still was n’t able to do access the CPVM or user VMs. I guess my understanding of vlans with security groups is limited, so if anyone knows about this feature or has used it - please help with some regression testing. I plan to continue testing this week with VMWare and fix any issues we find. ### Testing against Xen, KVM, VMWare etc. With a recent improvement to allow cpu features (such as vmx) on KVM hosts ( https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commit/58cc569273905c50d089f9fd82fe80028b4e9775), it’s now possible to run KVM, ESX, XenServer, OVM3 (LXC, and hopefully others) on KVM (in case of ESX a
Re: [DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
Hi Erik, On 29-Apr-2015, at 4:25 pm, Erik Weber terbol...@gmail.com wrote: Then it should always happen, no? It is sporadic, currently i have four routers happily being 4.5, but one that is 4.4. If you remove the VR which is 4.4, please check if the new one that gets created is 4.5 or still 4.4? Was this setup a fresh install or an upgrade from 4.4? It’s likely that something went wrong in case it was an upgrade. Perhaps, there are multiple secondary storages, in which case it could happen that one of them has an old template pre-seeded (The template copying across zones could have failed). Regards. Erik Den onsdag 29. april 2015 skrev Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com følgende: Hi Erik, On 29-Apr-2015, at 3:04 pm, Erik Weber terbol...@gmail.com javascript:; wrote: One bug I've found which drives me crazy is that, for some reason, the VR is versioned as 4.4.0 and needs to be upgraded. This only happens once in a while, and I have a hard time reproducing it. What drives me crazy is that 4.4.0 has never been installed so I have no idea why it has that version number, and upgrading doesn't work... It has been a few week since I updated the install, so it is closer to the current RC than it is to the 4.5 branch. I'll try to update it next week. The VR/systemvm version is taken from /etc/cloudstack-release file. It is likely you were using a 4.4 systemvm template (I’ve hit such issues in past when testing 4.4 with 4.5 etc). Regards, Rohit Yadav Software Architect, ShapeBlue M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com javascript:; Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services IaaS Cloud Design Build http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build// CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment frameworkhttp://shapeblue.com/csforge/ CloudStack Consultinghttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/ CloudStack Software Engineering http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/ CloudStack Infrastructure Support http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/ CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/ 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. Regards, Rohit Yadav Software Architect, ShapeBlue M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services IaaS Cloud Design Buildhttp://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build// CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment frameworkhttp://shapeblue.com/csforge/ CloudStack Consultinghttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/ CloudStack Software Engineeringhttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/ CloudStack Infrastructure Supporthttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/ CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courseshttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/ 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: [DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
Den onsdag 29. april 2015 skrev Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com følgende: Hi Erik, On 29-Apr-2015, at 4:25 pm, Erik Weber terbol...@gmail.com javascript:; wrote: Then it should always happen, no? It is sporadic, currently i have four routers happily being 4.5, but one that is 4.4. If you remove the VR which is 4.4, please check if the new one that gets created is 4.5 or still 4.4? It varies, sometimes 4.5, sometimes 4.4. Was this setup a fresh install or an upgrade from 4.4? It’s likely that something went wrong in case it was an upgrade. Perhaps, there are multiple secondary storages, in which case it could happen that one of them has an old template pre-seeded (The template copying across zones could have failed). Fresh install, no components has been used before. Regards. Erik Den onsdag 29. april 2015 skrev Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com javascript:; følgende: Hi Erik, On 29-Apr-2015, at 3:04 pm, Erik Weber terbol...@gmail.com javascript:; javascript:; wrote: One bug I've found which drives me crazy is that, for some reason, the VR is versioned as 4.4.0 and needs to be upgraded. This only happens once in a while, and I have a hard time reproducing it. What drives me crazy is that 4.4.0 has never been installed so I have no idea why it has that version number, and upgrading doesn't work... It has been a few week since I updated the install, so it is closer to the current RC than it is to the 4.5 branch. I'll try to update it next week. The VR/systemvm version is taken from /etc/cloudstack-release file. It is likely you were using a 4.4 systemvm template (I’ve hit such issues in past when testing 4.4 with 4.5 etc). Regards, Rohit Yadav Software Architect, ShapeBlue M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com javascript:; javascript:; Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services IaaS Cloud Design Build http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build// CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment frameworkhttp://shapeblue.com/csforge/ CloudStack Consultinghttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/ CloudStack Software Engineering http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/ CloudStack Infrastructure Support http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/ CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/ 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. Regards, Rohit Yadav Software Architect, ShapeBlue M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com javascript:; Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services IaaS Cloud Design Build http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build// CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment frameworkhttp://shapeblue.com/csforge/ CloudStack Consultinghttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/ CloudStack Software Engineering http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/ CloudStack Infrastructure Support http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/ CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses http://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/ 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
[DISCUSS] State of 4.5 and testing in local environments
Hi all, ### 4.5 Release Effort I’ve been exhaustively testing ACS 4.5 wrt Xen 6.2, Xen 6.5, KVM (qemu 2.0, 2.3) and I feel we’re pretty good but we need testing efforts and I want to help drive efforts to releasing ACS 4.5.1 -- if you’ve any issues that you would like to get fixed that are either regressions or blockers can you please share on this thread? If we don’t find any blockers or regressions let us invest in ACS 4.5 testing and release it soon. For other minor issues we can always fix them and release 4.5.2 etc if and when needed in future. Regarding my 4.5 testing - I’ve tested basic vm life cycle operations (deploy, start, stop, destroy/expunge, migrate to another host, migrate to another storage pool, deploy using iso) for all cases and found no issues; KVM with basic zone (with/without security groups, SG blockers were found and fixed) KVM with Adv zone (with/without security groups, both isolated network and VPC worked, networking issues were found and fixed) XenServer 6.2 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, no SG issues found) XenServer 6.5 with basic and adv zones (with/without security groups, SG blockers found and fixed) I found one issue that could be a blocker (if it’s not a hardware/env issue) -- when using security groups in advance zone with a dedicated vlan id (say vlan://500), I was unable to access the VMs (CPVM, SSVM, VR or user vms) though all normal vm_life cycles seems to work. Though this worked for me when I used the vlan://untagged. I tried to add vlan id 500 to my local nics using vconfig but I still was n’t able to do access the CPVM or user VMs. I guess my understanding of vlans with security groups is limited, so if anyone knows about this feature or has used it - please help with some regression testing. I plan to continue testing this week with VMWare and fix any issues we find. ### Testing against Xen, KVM, VMWare etc. With a recent improvement to allow cpu features (such as vmx) on KVM hosts (https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commit/58cc569273905c50d089f9fd82fe80028b4e9775), it’s now possible to run KVM, ESX, XenServer, OVM3 (LXC, and hopefully others) on KVM (in case of ESX a patched qemu would be needed: http://people.apache.org/~bhaisaab/qemu/). Such a (ansible based) tool aims to be reproduce such an environment for anyone and serve as a developer kit (not to be confused with the DevCloud appliance, will share more details of the developer kit later) and as an infrastructure to run integration testing suite we have now. This would allow us to build/test/run CloudStack against various nested-virtualized hosts running as guests on KVM, using CloudStack. Meanwhile, Abhi is focusing on existing (integration) tests and has increased the number of TravisCI tests: https://travis-ci.org/apache/cloudstack/builds/60365947 Our goal with these efforts is to (1) have a developer kit that a developer can have locally to build/test/develop CloudStack, (2) scale it up for bigger baremetal servers to run long running integration tests and have a better QA automation. Regards, Rohit Yadav Software Architect, ShapeBlue M. +91 88 262 30892 | rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com Blog: bhaisaab.org | Twitter: @_bhaisaab Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services IaaS Cloud Design Buildhttp://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build// CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment frameworkhttp://shapeblue.com/csforge/ CloudStack Consultinghttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-consultancy/ CloudStack Software Engineeringhttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-software-engineering/ CloudStack Infrastructure Supporthttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-infrastructure-support/ CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courseshttp://shapeblue.com/cloudstack-training/ 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.
