[GitHub] cloudstack issue #2023: BUG-ID: CLOUDSTACK-9808 Added system Vm upgrade path...

[wido]

Github user wido commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2023
  
LGTM


---
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 issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
Ping @karuturi 


---
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 issue #2023: BUG-ID: CLOUDSTACK-9808 Added system Vm upgrade path...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2023
  
LGTM


---
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 issue #2023: BUG-ID: CLOUDSTACK-9808 Added system Vm upgrade path...

[DaanHoogland]

Github user DaanHoogland commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2023
  
@karuturi I think it is easiest to just reapply and not search for the 
cause of an 8 month old PR resulting in conflicts. (if the original code has 
the right URLS in it)


---
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 issue #2023: BUG-ID: CLOUDSTACK-9808 Added system Vm upgrade path...

[karuturi]

Github user karuturi commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2023
  
code LGTM. Need to check why xenserver and KVM still have wrong urls on PR 
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1582#issuecomment-288310796 


---
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 issue #2023: BUG-ID: CLOUDSTACK-9808 Added system Vm upgrade path...

[DaanHoogland]

Github user DaanHoogland commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2023
  
LGTM
@kishankavala did you check what went wrong with the kvm template. 
@karuturi reported that and it was probably some auto-conflict-resolution.


---
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 issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
ping @karuturi let's merge 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.
---

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[syed]

Github user syed commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
Thanks @rhtyd for confirming. LGTM :+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 issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
@syed yes there is no problem I see, with `INSERT IGNORE` we can have this 
db change in both paths resulting in same final state.


---
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 issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[syed]

Github user syed commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
@rhtyd If I understand correctly if we add the DB changes in 4.9.2->4.9.3  
then after forward merging, upgrade from 4.9.2->4.10.0 should not have any 
problems with idempotency correct?


---
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 issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
@koushik-das there is plan for 4.9.3, though the db schema change to 
insert/update the hypervisor capability need to go into 4.10.0 either with this 
PR carefully fwd-merged (which I can help with) or as a separate PR targeted 
only for 4.10. 4.9.x should not have unnecessary db changes, therefore 
4.9.2->4.9.3 is not expected of any other db changes, with this assumption and 
that 4.9.3 should be worked upon in next few months this would add an upgrade 
path from both 4.9.2/4.9.3 to 4.10.0.


---
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 issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[koushik-das]

Github user koushik-das commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
I already see schema-4920to41000.sql and the corresponding cleanup file in 
master. So how will this fit in the overall scheme? Is there any plans for 
4.9.3?


---
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 issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
Requesting for review - @DaanHoogland @abhinandanprateek @karuturi 
@koushik-das @syed 


---
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: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Ron Wheeler]

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/10895969/can-newer-jre-versions-run-java-programs-compiled-with-older-jdk-versions
You can run code compiled by the java 1.7 or 1.6 or earlier SDKs on a 
Java 8 JVM.


This gets you the improved speed of the Java 8 JVM even if you do not 
rebuild the code.


If this was not true, life would be chaos when you upgraded your Java on 
a production server.

All of the code that ran a few minutes ago would fail.

Think about how much java is running on a typical data centre. You would 
have heard the howls of pain if all that code suddenly stopped running.


It should be easy to test the existing jars compiled with earlier 
version of java on a machine running the Java 8 JVM.

Just replace the Java and restart the server.

A reasonable migration path is to replace the JVM and continue to run 
existing code.

Upgrade the code at your leisure.

An application can be constructed from Jars from different SDKs.
I had no trouble with the dozens of Apache and third party libraries 
that make up my application when I changed my compiler to Java 8.
One minute I was compiling and testing with Java 7 and the next minute I 
was compiling with Java 8 and the code still worked with all of the same 
third party jars.


No source code changes where required in any code to upgrade.
Since then, I have incorporated  Java 8 features into most of our code 
but that is not really part of this discussion.


I hope that this helps.

Ron


Ron

On 21/02/2017 3:03 AM, Marc-Aurèle Brothier wrote:

No there isn't any issue except having the bugs & fixes of the JDK you're
using. You can compile it with a JDK 1.8 as long as you don't change the
target bytecode version for 1.7

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 8:15 AM, Wei ZHOU  wrote:


Marco,

Good point. Is there any issue if we compile code with jdk8 but run it on
jdk7 (systemvm) ?

-Wei

2017-02-21 7:43 GMT+01:00 Marc-Aurèle Brothier :


There's a list of compatibility issues between Java 7 & Java 8 here
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/8-
compatibility-guide-2156366.
html

The main problem I would see in two system communicating while running
different Java version is the way they handle serialization and
de-serialization of objects which had been a problem in the past between
some Java versions. AFAIK we're using JSON for that now, so if the code
already compiles with Java8, it should not be a problem.

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Wei ZHOU 

wrote:

We tested 4.7.1+systemd patches as well, it also works fine.

-Wei

2017-02-20 22:34 GMT+01:00 Wei ZHOU :


@Will and @Syed, I build the packages of 4.9.2+systemd patches on

ubuntu

16.04 (openjdk 8).
Then install the packages to management server and kvm hosts (all are
ubuntu 16.04 with openjdk8).
The systemvm template is 4.6 with openjdk7.

cpvm and ssvm work fine.

As there is no java process in VR, so I did not check, VR should not

be

impacted.

-Wei

2017-02-20 22:16 GMT+01:00 Pierre-Luc Dion :


That's quite interesting Chiradeep!

so I could do something like this I guest:

mvn clean install

and then this one to build the systemvm.iso:
mvn -Psystemvm -source 1.7 -target 1.7 install


I'll give it a try! but for now, I'm worried about existing VR, they

must

continue to work while running on jdk7.  newer VPC would be ok to

run

with

jdk8.  but we need to make sure while upgrading the

management-server

we

are not in the obligation to upgrade VR's.

For sure it is required for strongswan + JDK8 to ugprade the VR,

but a

  existing VR should remain usable for port forwarding, vm creation

and

such...

I'll post my finding...

Thanks !



On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Chiradeep Vittal <

chirade...@gmail.com

wrote:


You can build the system vm with  -source 1.7 -target 1.7
Also unless you are using Java8 features (lambda) the classfiles

produced

by javac 8 should work in a 1.7 JVM

Sent from my iPhone


On Feb 20, 2017, at 11:51 AM, Will Stevens <

wstev...@cloudops.com

wrote:

yes, that is what I was expecting.  which is why I was asking

about

Wei's

setup because he seems to have worked around that problem.  Or

he

has

a

custom SystemVM template running with both JDK7 and JDK8.

*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer




On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Syed Ahmed <

sah...@cloudops.com

wrote:

The problem is that systemvm.iso is built with java 8 whereas

java

on

the

VR is java 7

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 13:20 Will Stevens <

wstev...@cloudops.com

wrote:

Did it work after resetting a VPC or when blowing away the

SSVM

or

CPVM?  I

would not expect the SSVM or the CPVM to come up if the

management

server

was built with JDK8 and the system vm template is only using

JDK7.

Can

you

confirm?​

*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer




On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Wei ZHOU <

ustcweiz...@gmail.com

wrote:

We've 

Re: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Marc-Aurèle Brothier]

No there isn't any issue except having the bugs & fixes of the JDK you're
using. You can compile it with a JDK 1.8 as long as you don't change the
target bytecode version for 1.7

On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 8:15 AM, Wei ZHOU  wrote:

> Marco,
>
> Good point. Is there any issue if we compile code with jdk8 but run it on
> jdk7 (systemvm) ?
>
> -Wei
>
> 2017-02-21 7:43 GMT+01:00 Marc-Aurèle Brothier :
>
> > There's a list of compatibility issues between Java 7 & Java 8 here
> > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/8-
> > compatibility-guide-2156366.
> > html
> >
> > The main problem I would see in two system communicating while running
> > different Java version is the way they handle serialization and
> > de-serialization of objects which had been a problem in the past between
> > some Java versions. AFAIK we're using JSON for that now, so if the code
> > already compiles with Java8, it should not be a problem.
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Wei ZHOU 
> wrote:
> >
> > > We tested 4.7.1+systemd patches as well, it also works fine.
> > >
> > > -Wei
> > >
> > > 2017-02-20 22:34 GMT+01:00 Wei ZHOU :
> > >
> > > > @Will and @Syed, I build the packages of 4.9.2+systemd patches on
> > ubuntu
> > > > 16.04 (openjdk 8).
> > > > Then install the packages to management server and kvm hosts (all are
> > > > ubuntu 16.04 with openjdk8).
> > > > The systemvm template is 4.6 with openjdk7.
> > > >
> > > > cpvm and ssvm work fine.
> > > >
> > > > As there is no java process in VR, so I did not check, VR should not
> be
> > > > impacted.
> > > >
> > > > -Wei
> > > >
> > > > 2017-02-20 22:16 GMT+01:00 Pierre-Luc Dion :
> > > >
> > > >> That's quite interesting Chiradeep!
> > > >>
> > > >> so I could do something like this I guest:
> > > >>
> > > >> mvn clean install
> > > >>
> > > >> and then this one to build the systemvm.iso:
> > > >> mvn -Psystemvm -source 1.7 -target 1.7 install
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> I'll give it a try! but for now, I'm worried about existing VR, they
> > > must
> > > >> continue to work while running on jdk7.  newer VPC would be ok to
> run
> > > with
> > > >> jdk8.  but we need to make sure while upgrading the
> management-server
> > we
> > > >> are not in the obligation to upgrade VR's.
> > > >>
> > > >> For sure it is required for strongswan + JDK8 to ugprade the VR,
> but a
> > > >>  existing VR should remain usable for port forwarding, vm creation
> and
> > > >> such...
> > > >>
> > > >> I'll post my finding...
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks !
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Chiradeep Vittal <
> > chirade...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > You can build the system vm with  -source 1.7 -target 1.7
> > > >> > Also unless you are using Java8 features (lambda) the classfiles
> > > >> produced
> > > >> > by javac 8 should work in a 1.7 JVM
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Sent from my iPhone
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > On Feb 20, 2017, at 11:51 AM, Will Stevens <
> wstev...@cloudops.com
> > >
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > yes, that is what I was expecting.  which is why I was asking
> > about
> > > >> Wei's
> > > >> > > setup because he seems to have worked around that problem.  Or
> he
> > > has
> > > >> a
> > > >> > > custom SystemVM template running with both JDK7 and JDK8.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > *Will STEVENS*
> > > >> > > Lead Developer
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > 
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Syed Ahmed <
> sah...@cloudops.com
> > >
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> The problem is that systemvm.iso is built with java 8 whereas
> > java
> > > on
> > > >> > the
> > > >> > >> VR is java 7
> > > >> > >>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 13:20 Will Stevens <
> > wstev...@cloudops.com
> > > >
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> Did it work after resetting a VPC or when blowing away the
> SSVM
> > or
> > > >> > >> CPVM?  I
> > > >> > >>> would not expect the SSVM or the CPVM to come up if the
> > management
> > > >> > server
> > > >> > >>> was built with JDK8 and the system vm template is only using
> > JDK7.
> > > >> Can
> > > >> > >> you
> > > >> > >>> confirm?​
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> *Will STEVENS*
> > > >> > >>> Lead Developer
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> > >>> 
> > > >> > >>>
> > > >> >  On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Wei ZHOU <
> > ustcweiz...@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > >> > wrote:
> > > >> > 
> > > >> >  We've tested management server 4.7.1 with ubuntu
> 16.04/openjdk8
> > > and
> > > >> >  systemvm 4.6 with debian7/openjdk7.
> > > >> >  The systemvms (ssvm, cpvm) work fine.
> > > >> > 
> > > >> >  I agree we need consider the openjdk upgrade in systemvm
> > > template.
> > > >> > 
> > > >> >  -Wei
> > > >> > 
> > > >> >  2017-02-20 18:15 GMT+01:00 Will Stevens <
> 

[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
Thanks @borisstoyanov 
@karuturi ping


---
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: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Wei ZHOU]

Marco,

Good point. Is there any issue if we compile code with jdk8 but run it on
jdk7 (systemvm) ?

-Wei

2017-02-21 7:43 GMT+01:00 Marc-Aurèle Brothier :

> There's a list of compatibility issues between Java 7 & Java 8 here
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/8-
> compatibility-guide-2156366.
> html
>
> The main problem I would see in two system communicating while running
> different Java version is the way they handle serialization and
> de-serialization of objects which had been a problem in the past between
> some Java versions. AFAIK we're using JSON for that now, so if the code
> already compiles with Java8, it should not be a problem.
>
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Wei ZHOU  wrote:
>
> > We tested 4.7.1+systemd patches as well, it also works fine.
> >
> > -Wei
> >
> > 2017-02-20 22:34 GMT+01:00 Wei ZHOU :
> >
> > > @Will and @Syed, I build the packages of 4.9.2+systemd patches on
> ubuntu
> > > 16.04 (openjdk 8).
> > > Then install the packages to management server and kvm hosts (all are
> > > ubuntu 16.04 with openjdk8).
> > > The systemvm template is 4.6 with openjdk7.
> > >
> > > cpvm and ssvm work fine.
> > >
> > > As there is no java process in VR, so I did not check, VR should not be
> > > impacted.
> > >
> > > -Wei
> > >
> > > 2017-02-20 22:16 GMT+01:00 Pierre-Luc Dion :
> > >
> > >> That's quite interesting Chiradeep!
> > >>
> > >> so I could do something like this I guest:
> > >>
> > >> mvn clean install
> > >>
> > >> and then this one to build the systemvm.iso:
> > >> mvn -Psystemvm -source 1.7 -target 1.7 install
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> I'll give it a try! but for now, I'm worried about existing VR, they
> > must
> > >> continue to work while running on jdk7.  newer VPC would be ok to run
> > with
> > >> jdk8.  but we need to make sure while upgrading the management-server
> we
> > >> are not in the obligation to upgrade VR's.
> > >>
> > >> For sure it is required for strongswan + JDK8 to ugprade the VR, but a
> > >>  existing VR should remain usable for port forwarding, vm creation and
> > >> such...
> > >>
> > >> I'll post my finding...
> > >>
> > >> Thanks !
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Chiradeep Vittal <
> chirade...@gmail.com
> > >
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > You can build the system vm with  -source 1.7 -target 1.7
> > >> > Also unless you are using Java8 features (lambda) the classfiles
> > >> produced
> > >> > by javac 8 should work in a 1.7 JVM
> > >> >
> > >> > Sent from my iPhone
> > >> >
> > >> > > On Feb 20, 2017, at 11:51 AM, Will Stevens  >
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > yes, that is what I was expecting.  which is why I was asking
> about
> > >> Wei's
> > >> > > setup because he seems to have worked around that problem.  Or he
> > has
> > >> a
> > >> > > custom SystemVM template running with both JDK7 and JDK8.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > *Will STEVENS*
> > >> > > Lead Developer
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Syed Ahmed  >
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> The problem is that systemvm.iso is built with java 8 whereas
> java
> > on
> > >> > the
> > >> > >> VR is java 7
> > >> > >>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 13:20 Will Stevens <
> wstev...@cloudops.com
> > >
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> Did it work after resetting a VPC or when blowing away the SSVM
> or
> > >> > >> CPVM?  I
> > >> > >>> would not expect the SSVM or the CPVM to come up if the
> management
> > >> > server
> > >> > >>> was built with JDK8 and the system vm template is only using
> JDK7.
> > >> Can
> > >> > >> you
> > >> > >>> confirm?​
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> *Will STEVENS*
> > >> > >>> Lead Developer
> > >> > >>>
> > >> > >>> 
> > >> > >>>
> > >> >  On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Wei ZHOU <
> ustcweiz...@gmail.com
> > >
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > 
> > >> >  We've tested management server 4.7.1 with ubuntu 16.04/openjdk8
> > and
> > >> >  systemvm 4.6 with debian7/openjdk7.
> > >> >  The systemvms (ssvm, cpvm) work fine.
> > >> > 
> > >> >  I agree we need consider the openjdk upgrade in systemvm
> > template.
> > >> > 
> > >> >  -Wei
> > >> > 
> > >> >  2017-02-20 18:15 GMT+01:00 Will Stevens  >:
> > >> > 
> > >> > > Regarding my question. Is it because of the version of Java
> that
> > >> the
> > >> > > systemvm.iso is built on?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Feb 20, 2017 11:58 AM, "Will Stevens" <
> wstev...@cloudops.com
> > >
> > >> > >>> wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > >> A question that is hidden in here is:
> > >> > >> - Why does the JDK version on the management server have to
> > match
> > >> > >> the
> > >> >  JDK
> > >> > >> version of the System VM?
> > >> > >>
> > >> > >> *Will STEVENS*
> > >> > 

Re: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Marc-Aurèle Brothier]

There's a list of compatibility issues between Java 7 & Java 8 here
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/8-compatibility-guide-2156366.
html

The main problem I would see in two system communicating while running
different Java version is the way they handle serialization and
de-serialization of objects which had been a problem in the past between
some Java versions. AFAIK we're using JSON for that now, so if the code
already compiles with Java8, it should not be a problem.

On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 10:36 PM, Wei ZHOU  wrote:

> We tested 4.7.1+systemd patches as well, it also works fine.
>
> -Wei
>
> 2017-02-20 22:34 GMT+01:00 Wei ZHOU :
>
> > @Will and @Syed, I build the packages of 4.9.2+systemd patches on ubuntu
> > 16.04 (openjdk 8).
> > Then install the packages to management server and kvm hosts (all are
> > ubuntu 16.04 with openjdk8).
> > The systemvm template is 4.6 with openjdk7.
> >
> > cpvm and ssvm work fine.
> >
> > As there is no java process in VR, so I did not check, VR should not be
> > impacted.
> >
> > -Wei
> >
> > 2017-02-20 22:16 GMT+01:00 Pierre-Luc Dion :
> >
> >> That's quite interesting Chiradeep!
> >>
> >> so I could do something like this I guest:
> >>
> >> mvn clean install
> >>
> >> and then this one to build the systemvm.iso:
> >> mvn -Psystemvm -source 1.7 -target 1.7 install
> >>
> >>
> >> I'll give it a try! but for now, I'm worried about existing VR, they
> must
> >> continue to work while running on jdk7.  newer VPC would be ok to run
> with
> >> jdk8.  but we need to make sure while upgrading the management-server we
> >> are not in the obligation to upgrade VR's.
> >>
> >> For sure it is required for strongswan + JDK8 to ugprade the VR, but a
> >>  existing VR should remain usable for port forwarding, vm creation and
> >> such...
> >>
> >> I'll post my finding...
> >>
> >> Thanks !
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Chiradeep Vittal  >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > You can build the system vm with  -source 1.7 -target 1.7
> >> > Also unless you are using Java8 features (lambda) the classfiles
> >> produced
> >> > by javac 8 should work in a 1.7 JVM
> >> >
> >> > Sent from my iPhone
> >> >
> >> > > On Feb 20, 2017, at 11:51 AM, Will Stevens 
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > yes, that is what I was expecting.  which is why I was asking about
> >> Wei's
> >> > > setup because he seems to have worked around that problem.  Or he
> has
> >> a
> >> > > custom SystemVM template running with both JDK7 and JDK8.
> >> > >
> >> > > *Will STEVENS*
> >> > > Lead Developer
> >> > >
> >> > > 
> >> > >
> >> > >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Syed Ahmed 
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >> The problem is that systemvm.iso is built with java 8 whereas java
> on
> >> > the
> >> > >> VR is java 7
> >> > >>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 13:20 Will Stevens  >
> >> > wrote:
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> Did it work after resetting a VPC or when blowing away the SSVM or
> >> > >> CPVM?  I
> >> > >>> would not expect the SSVM or the CPVM to come up if the management
> >> > server
> >> > >>> was built with JDK8 and the system vm template is only using JDK7.
> >> Can
> >> > >> you
> >> > >>> confirm?​
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> *Will STEVENS*
> >> > >>> Lead Developer
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> 
> >> > >>>
> >> >  On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Wei ZHOU  >
> >> > wrote:
> >> > 
> >> >  We've tested management server 4.7.1 with ubuntu 16.04/openjdk8
> and
> >> >  systemvm 4.6 with debian7/openjdk7.
> >> >  The systemvms (ssvm, cpvm) work fine.
> >> > 
> >> >  I agree we need consider the openjdk upgrade in systemvm
> template.
> >> > 
> >> >  -Wei
> >> > 
> >> >  2017-02-20 18:15 GMT+01:00 Will Stevens :
> >> > 
> >> > > Regarding my question. Is it because of the version of Java that
> >> the
> >> > > systemvm.iso is built on?
> >> > >
> >> > > On Feb 20, 2017 11:58 AM, "Will Stevens"  >
> >> > >>> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> A question that is hidden in here is:
> >> > >> - Why does the JDK version on the management server have to
> match
> >> > >> the
> >> >  JDK
> >> > >> version of the System VM?
> >> > >>
> >> > >> *Will STEVENS*
> >> > >> Lead Developer
> >> > >>
> >> > >> 
> >> > >>
> >> > >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion <
> >> > >>> pd...@cloudops.com>
> >> > >> wrote:
> >> > >>
> >> > >>> Hi,
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> In the context of deployment of CloudStack with VPCs,
> >> > >>> What will happen to a cloud when upgrading to 4.10 that now
> use
> >> > >>> jdk8?
> >> > >>>
> >> > >>> Does upgrading the management-server to 4.10 jdk8 and 

Re: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Wei ZHOU]

We tested 4.7.1+systemd patches as well, it also works fine.

-Wei

2017-02-20 22:34 GMT+01:00 Wei ZHOU :

> @Will and @Syed, I build the packages of 4.9.2+systemd patches on ubuntu
> 16.04 (openjdk 8).
> Then install the packages to management server and kvm hosts (all are
> ubuntu 16.04 with openjdk8).
> The systemvm template is 4.6 with openjdk7.
>
> cpvm and ssvm work fine.
>
> As there is no java process in VR, so I did not check, VR should not be
> impacted.
>
> -Wei
>
> 2017-02-20 22:16 GMT+01:00 Pierre-Luc Dion :
>
>> That's quite interesting Chiradeep!
>>
>> so I could do something like this I guest:
>>
>> mvn clean install
>>
>> and then this one to build the systemvm.iso:
>> mvn -Psystemvm -source 1.7 -target 1.7 install
>>
>>
>> I'll give it a try! but for now, I'm worried about existing VR, they must
>> continue to work while running on jdk7.  newer VPC would be ok to run with
>> jdk8.  but we need to make sure while upgrading the management-server we
>> are not in the obligation to upgrade VR's.
>>
>> For sure it is required for strongswan + JDK8 to ugprade the VR, but a
>>  existing VR should remain usable for port forwarding, vm creation and
>> such...
>>
>> I'll post my finding...
>>
>> Thanks !
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Chiradeep Vittal 
>> wrote:
>>
>> > You can build the system vm with  -source 1.7 -target 1.7
>> > Also unless you are using Java8 features (lambda) the classfiles
>> produced
>> > by javac 8 should work in a 1.7 JVM
>> >
>> > Sent from my iPhone
>> >
>> > > On Feb 20, 2017, at 11:51 AM, Will Stevens 
>> > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > yes, that is what I was expecting.  which is why I was asking about
>> Wei's
>> > > setup because he seems to have worked around that problem.  Or he has
>> a
>> > > custom SystemVM template running with both JDK7 and JDK8.
>> > >
>> > > *Will STEVENS*
>> > > Lead Developer
>> > >
>> > > 
>> > >
>> > >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Syed Ahmed 
>> > wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> The problem is that systemvm.iso is built with java 8 whereas java on
>> > the
>> > >> VR is java 7
>> > >>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 13:20 Will Stevens 
>> > wrote:
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Did it work after resetting a VPC or when blowing away the SSVM or
>> > >> CPVM?  I
>> > >>> would not expect the SSVM or the CPVM to come up if the management
>> > server
>> > >>> was built with JDK8 and the system vm template is only using JDK7.
>> Can
>> > >> you
>> > >>> confirm?​
>> > >>>
>> > >>> *Will STEVENS*
>> > >>> Lead Developer
>> > >>>
>> > >>> 
>> > >>>
>> >  On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Wei ZHOU 
>> > wrote:
>> > 
>> >  We've tested management server 4.7.1 with ubuntu 16.04/openjdk8 and
>> >  systemvm 4.6 with debian7/openjdk7.
>> >  The systemvms (ssvm, cpvm) work fine.
>> > 
>> >  I agree we need consider the openjdk upgrade in systemvm template.
>> > 
>> >  -Wei
>> > 
>> >  2017-02-20 18:15 GMT+01:00 Will Stevens :
>> > 
>> > > Regarding my question. Is it because of the version of Java that
>> the
>> > > systemvm.iso is built on?
>> > >
>> > > On Feb 20, 2017 11:58 AM, "Will Stevens" 
>> > >>> wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> A question that is hidden in here is:
>> > >> - Why does the JDK version on the management server have to match
>> > >> the
>> >  JDK
>> > >> version of the System VM?
>> > >>
>> > >> *Will STEVENS*
>> > >> Lead Developer
>> > >>
>> > >> 
>> > >>
>> > >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion <
>> > >>> pd...@cloudops.com>
>> > >> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >>> Hi,
>> > >>>
>> > >>> In the context of deployment of CloudStack with VPCs,
>> > >>> What will happen to a cloud when upgrading to 4.10 that now use
>> > >>> jdk8?
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Does upgrading the management-server to 4.10 jdk8 and then keep
>> > >> the
>> >  old
>> > >>> VRs
>> > >>> run for a while that run on JDK7 will still work ?
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Because If we upgrade the management-server to jdk8, we need to
>> > >> keep
>> >  VR
>> > > to
>> > >>> work until they get upgraded but we can't force an upgrade of VR
>> > >>> just
>> > >>> because the management-server is now using JDK8.
>> > >>>
>> > >>> Thanks,
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > 
>> > >>>
>> > >>
>> >
>>
>
>

Re: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Wei ZHOU]

@Will and @Syed, I build the packages of 4.9.2+systemd patches on ubuntu
16.04 (openjdk 8).
Then install the packages to management server and kvm hosts (all are
ubuntu 16.04 with openjdk8).
The systemvm template is 4.6 with openjdk7.

cpvm and ssvm work fine.

As there is no java process in VR, so I did not check, VR should not be
impacted.

-Wei

2017-02-20 22:16 GMT+01:00 Pierre-Luc Dion :

> That's quite interesting Chiradeep!
>
> so I could do something like this I guest:
>
> mvn clean install
>
> and then this one to build the systemvm.iso:
> mvn -Psystemvm -source 1.7 -target 1.7 install
>
>
> I'll give it a try! but for now, I'm worried about existing VR, they must
> continue to work while running on jdk7.  newer VPC would be ok to run with
> jdk8.  but we need to make sure while upgrading the management-server we
> are not in the obligation to upgrade VR's.
>
> For sure it is required for strongswan + JDK8 to ugprade the VR, but a
>  existing VR should remain usable for port forwarding, vm creation and
> such...
>
> I'll post my finding...
>
> Thanks !
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Chiradeep Vittal 
> wrote:
>
> > You can build the system vm with  -source 1.7 -target 1.7
> > Also unless you are using Java8 features (lambda) the classfiles produced
> > by javac 8 should work in a 1.7 JVM
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > > On Feb 20, 2017, at 11:51 AM, Will Stevens 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > yes, that is what I was expecting.  which is why I was asking about
> Wei's
> > > setup because he seems to have worked around that problem.  Or he has a
> > > custom SystemVM template running with both JDK7 and JDK8.
> > >
> > > *Will STEVENS*
> > > Lead Developer
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Syed Ahmed 
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> The problem is that systemvm.iso is built with java 8 whereas java on
> > the
> > >> VR is java 7
> > >>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 13:20 Will Stevens 
> > wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Did it work after resetting a VPC or when blowing away the SSVM or
> > >> CPVM?  I
> > >>> would not expect the SSVM or the CPVM to come up if the management
> > server
> > >>> was built with JDK8 and the system vm template is only using JDK7.
> Can
> > >> you
> > >>> confirm?​
> > >>>
> > >>> *Will STEVENS*
> > >>> Lead Developer
> > >>>
> > >>> 
> > >>>
> >  On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Wei ZHOU 
> > wrote:
> > 
> >  We've tested management server 4.7.1 with ubuntu 16.04/openjdk8 and
> >  systemvm 4.6 with debian7/openjdk7.
> >  The systemvms (ssvm, cpvm) work fine.
> > 
> >  I agree we need consider the openjdk upgrade in systemvm template.
> > 
> >  -Wei
> > 
> >  2017-02-20 18:15 GMT+01:00 Will Stevens :
> > 
> > > Regarding my question. Is it because of the version of Java that
> the
> > > systemvm.iso is built on?
> > >
> > > On Feb 20, 2017 11:58 AM, "Will Stevens" 
> > >>> wrote:
> > >
> > >> A question that is hidden in here is:
> > >> - Why does the JDK version on the management server have to match
> > >> the
> >  JDK
> > >> version of the System VM?
> > >>
> > >> *Will STEVENS*
> > >> Lead Developer
> > >>
> > >> 
> > >>
> > >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion <
> > >>> pd...@cloudops.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Hi,
> > >>>
> > >>> In the context of deployment of CloudStack with VPCs,
> > >>> What will happen to a cloud when upgrading to 4.10 that now use
> > >>> jdk8?
> > >>>
> > >>> Does upgrading the management-server to 4.10 jdk8 and then keep
> > >> the
> >  old
> > >>> VRs
> > >>> run for a while that run on JDK7 will still work ?
> > >>>
> > >>> Because If we upgrade the management-server to jdk8, we need to
> > >> keep
> >  VR
> > > to
> > >>> work until they get upgraded but we can't force an upgrade of VR
> > >>> just
> > >>> because the management-server is now using JDK8.
> > >>>
> > >>> Thanks,
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > 
> > >>>
> > >>
> >
>

Re: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Pierre-Luc Dion]

That's quite interesting Chiradeep!

so I could do something like this I guest:

mvn clean install

and then this one to build the systemvm.iso:
mvn -Psystemvm -source 1.7 -target 1.7 install


I'll give it a try! but for now, I'm worried about existing VR, they must
continue to work while running on jdk7.  newer VPC would be ok to run with
jdk8.  but we need to make sure while upgrading the management-server we
are not in the obligation to upgrade VR's.

For sure it is required for strongswan + JDK8 to ugprade the VR, but a
 existing VR should remain usable for port forwarding, vm creation and
such...

I'll post my finding...

Thanks !



On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 3:59 PM, Chiradeep Vittal 
wrote:

> You can build the system vm with  -source 1.7 -target 1.7
> Also unless you are using Java8 features (lambda) the classfiles produced
> by javac 8 should work in a 1.7 JVM
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Feb 20, 2017, at 11:51 AM, Will Stevens 
> wrote:
> >
> > yes, that is what I was expecting.  which is why I was asking about Wei's
> > setup because he seems to have worked around that problem.  Or he has a
> > custom SystemVM template running with both JDK7 and JDK8.
> >
> > *Will STEVENS*
> > Lead Developer
> >
> > 
> >
> >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Syed Ahmed 
> wrote:
> >>
> >> The problem is that systemvm.iso is built with java 8 whereas java on
> the
> >> VR is java 7
> >>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 13:20 Will Stevens 
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Did it work after resetting a VPC or when blowing away the SSVM or
> >> CPVM?  I
> >>> would not expect the SSVM or the CPVM to come up if the management
> server
> >>> was built with JDK8 and the system vm template is only using JDK7.  Can
> >> you
> >>> confirm?​
> >>>
> >>> *Will STEVENS*
> >>> Lead Developer
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
>  On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Wei ZHOU 
> wrote:
> 
>  We've tested management server 4.7.1 with ubuntu 16.04/openjdk8 and
>  systemvm 4.6 with debian7/openjdk7.
>  The systemvms (ssvm, cpvm) work fine.
> 
>  I agree we need consider the openjdk upgrade in systemvm template.
> 
>  -Wei
> 
>  2017-02-20 18:15 GMT+01:00 Will Stevens :
> 
> > Regarding my question. Is it because of the version of Java that the
> > systemvm.iso is built on?
> >
> > On Feb 20, 2017 11:58 AM, "Will Stevens" 
> >>> wrote:
> >
> >> A question that is hidden in here is:
> >> - Why does the JDK version on the management server have to match
> >> the
>  JDK
> >> version of the System VM?
> >>
> >> *Will STEVENS*
> >> Lead Developer
> >>
> >> 
> >>
> >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion <
> >>> pd...@cloudops.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> In the context of deployment of CloudStack with VPCs,
> >>> What will happen to a cloud when upgrading to 4.10 that now use
> >>> jdk8?
> >>>
> >>> Does upgrading the management-server to 4.10 jdk8 and then keep
> >> the
>  old
> >>> VRs
> >>> run for a while that run on JDK7 will still work ?
> >>>
> >>> Because If we upgrade the management-server to jdk8, we need to
> >> keep
>  VR
> > to
> >>> work until they get upgraded but we can't force an upgrade of VR
> >>> just
> >>> because the management-server is now using JDK8.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> 
> >>>
> >>
>

Re: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Chiradeep Vittal]

You can build the system vm with  -source 1.7 -target 1.7 
Also unless you are using Java8 features (lambda) the classfiles produced by 
javac 8 should work in a 1.7 JVM

Sent from my iPhone

> On Feb 20, 2017, at 11:51 AM, Will Stevens  wrote:
> 
> yes, that is what I was expecting.  which is why I was asking about Wei's
> setup because he seems to have worked around that problem.  Or he has a
> custom SystemVM template running with both JDK7 and JDK8.
> 
> *Will STEVENS*
> Lead Developer
> 
> 
> 
>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Syed Ahmed  wrote:
>> 
>> The problem is that systemvm.iso is built with java 8 whereas java on the
>> VR is java 7
>>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 13:20 Will Stevens  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Did it work after resetting a VPC or when blowing away the SSVM or
>> CPVM?  I
>>> would not expect the SSVM or the CPVM to come up if the management server
>>> was built with JDK8 and the system vm template is only using JDK7.  Can
>> you
>>> confirm?​
>>> 
>>> *Will STEVENS*
>>> Lead Developer
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Wei ZHOU  wrote:
 
 We've tested management server 4.7.1 with ubuntu 16.04/openjdk8 and
 systemvm 4.6 with debian7/openjdk7.
 The systemvms (ssvm, cpvm) work fine.
 
 I agree we need consider the openjdk upgrade in systemvm template.
 
 -Wei
 
 2017-02-20 18:15 GMT+01:00 Will Stevens :
 
> Regarding my question. Is it because of the version of Java that the
> systemvm.iso is built on?
> 
> On Feb 20, 2017 11:58 AM, "Will Stevens" 
>>> wrote:
> 
>> A question that is hidden in here is:
>> - Why does the JDK version on the management server have to match
>> the
 JDK
>> version of the System VM?
>> 
>> *Will STEVENS*
>> Lead Developer
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion <
>>> pd...@cloudops.com>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> In the context of deployment of CloudStack with VPCs,
>>> What will happen to a cloud when upgrading to 4.10 that now use
>>> jdk8?
>>> 
>>> Does upgrading the management-server to 4.10 jdk8 and then keep
>> the
 old
>>> VRs
>>> run for a while that run on JDK7 will still work ?
>>> 
>>> Because If we upgrade the management-server to jdk8, we need to
>> keep
 VR
> to
>>> work until they get upgraded but we can't force an upgrade of VR
>>> just
>>> because the management-server is now using JDK8.
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
 
>>> 
>> 

Re: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Will Stevens]

yes, that is what I was expecting.  which is why I was asking about Wei's
setup because he seems to have worked around that problem.  Or he has a
custom SystemVM template running with both JDK7 and JDK8.

*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer



On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Syed Ahmed  wrote:

> The problem is that systemvm.iso is built with java 8 whereas java on the
> VR is java 7
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 13:20 Will Stevens  wrote:
>
> > Did it work after resetting a VPC or when blowing away the SSVM or
> CPVM?  I
> > would not expect the SSVM or the CPVM to come up if the management server
> > was built with JDK8 and the system vm template is only using JDK7.  Can
> you
> > confirm?​
> >
> > *Will STEVENS*
> > Lead Developer
> >
> > 
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Wei ZHOU  wrote:
> >
> > > We've tested management server 4.7.1 with ubuntu 16.04/openjdk8 and
> > > systemvm 4.6 with debian7/openjdk7.
> > > The systemvms (ssvm, cpvm) work fine.
> > >
> > > I agree we need consider the openjdk upgrade in systemvm template.
> > >
> > > -Wei
> > >
> > > 2017-02-20 18:15 GMT+01:00 Will Stevens :
> > >
> > > > Regarding my question. Is it because of the version of Java that the
> > > > systemvm.iso is built on?
> > > >
> > > > On Feb 20, 2017 11:58 AM, "Will Stevens" 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > A question that is hidden in here is:
> > > > > - Why does the JDK version on the management server have to match
> the
> > > JDK
> > > > > version of the System VM?
> > > > >
> > > > > *Will STEVENS*
> > > > > Lead Developer
> > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion <
> > pd...@cloudops.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Hi,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> In the context of deployment of CloudStack with VPCs,
> > > > >> What will happen to a cloud when upgrading to 4.10 that now use
> > jdk8?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Does upgrading the management-server to 4.10 jdk8 and then keep
> the
> > > old
> > > > >> VRs
> > > > >> run for a while that run on JDK7 will still work ?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Because If we upgrade the management-server to jdk8, we need to
> keep
> > > VR
> > > > to
> > > > >> work until they get upgraded but we can't force an upgrade of VR
> > just
> > > > >> because the management-server is now using JDK8.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Thanks,
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Syed Ahmed]

The problem is that systemvm.iso is built with java 8 whereas java on the
VR is java 7
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 13:20 Will Stevens  wrote:

> Did it work after resetting a VPC or when blowing away the SSVM or CPVM?  I
> would not expect the SSVM or the CPVM to come up if the management server
> was built with JDK8 and the system vm template is only using JDK7.  Can you
> confirm?​
>
> *Will STEVENS*
> Lead Developer
>
> 
>
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Wei ZHOU  wrote:
>
> > We've tested management server 4.7.1 with ubuntu 16.04/openjdk8 and
> > systemvm 4.6 with debian7/openjdk7.
> > The systemvms (ssvm, cpvm) work fine.
> >
> > I agree we need consider the openjdk upgrade in systemvm template.
> >
> > -Wei
> >
> > 2017-02-20 18:15 GMT+01:00 Will Stevens :
> >
> > > Regarding my question. Is it because of the version of Java that the
> > > systemvm.iso is built on?
> > >
> > > On Feb 20, 2017 11:58 AM, "Will Stevens" 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > A question that is hidden in here is:
> > > > - Why does the JDK version on the management server have to match the
> > JDK
> > > > version of the System VM?
> > > >
> > > > *Will STEVENS*
> > > > Lead Developer
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion <
> pd...@cloudops.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >>
> > > >> In the context of deployment of CloudStack with VPCs,
> > > >> What will happen to a cloud when upgrading to 4.10 that now use
> jdk8?
> > > >>
> > > >> Does upgrading the management-server to 4.10 jdk8 and then keep the
> > old
> > > >> VRs
> > > >> run for a while that run on JDK7 will still work ?
> > > >>
> > > >> Because If we upgrade the management-server to jdk8, we need to keep
> > VR
> > > to
> > > >> work until they get upgraded but we can't force an upgrade of VR
> just
> > > >> because the management-server is now using JDK8.
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Will Stevens]

Did it work after resetting a VPC or when blowing away the SSVM or CPVM?  I
would not expect the SSVM or the CPVM to come up if the management server
was built with JDK8 and the system vm template is only using JDK7.  Can you
confirm?​

*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer



On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Wei ZHOU  wrote:

> We've tested management server 4.7.1 with ubuntu 16.04/openjdk8 and
> systemvm 4.6 with debian7/openjdk7.
> The systemvms (ssvm, cpvm) work fine.
>
> I agree we need consider the openjdk upgrade in systemvm template.
>
> -Wei
>
> 2017-02-20 18:15 GMT+01:00 Will Stevens :
>
> > Regarding my question. Is it because of the version of Java that the
> > systemvm.iso is built on?
> >
> > On Feb 20, 2017 11:58 AM, "Will Stevens"  wrote:
> >
> > > A question that is hidden in here is:
> > > - Why does the JDK version on the management server have to match the
> JDK
> > > version of the System VM?
> > >
> > > *Will STEVENS*
> > > Lead Developer
> > >
> > > 
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> In the context of deployment of CloudStack with VPCs,
> > >> What will happen to a cloud when upgrading to 4.10 that now use jdk8?
> > >>
> > >> Does upgrading the management-server to 4.10 jdk8 and then keep the
> old
> > >> VRs
> > >> run for a while that run on JDK7 will still work ?
> > >>
> > >> Because If we upgrade the management-server to jdk8, we need to keep
> VR
> > to
> > >> work until they get upgraded but we can't force an upgrade of VR just
> > >> because the management-server is now using JDK8.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Re: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Wei ZHOU]

We've tested management server 4.7.1 with ubuntu 16.04/openjdk8 and
systemvm 4.6 with debian7/openjdk7.
The systemvms (ssvm, cpvm) work fine.

I agree we need consider the openjdk upgrade in systemvm template.

-Wei

2017-02-20 18:15 GMT+01:00 Will Stevens :

> Regarding my question. Is it because of the version of Java that the
> systemvm.iso is built on?
>
> On Feb 20, 2017 11:58 AM, "Will Stevens"  wrote:
>
> > A question that is hidden in here is:
> > - Why does the JDK version on the management server have to match the JDK
> > version of the System VM?
> >
> > *Will STEVENS*
> > Lead Developer
> >
> > 
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> In the context of deployment of CloudStack with VPCs,
> >> What will happen to a cloud when upgrading to 4.10 that now use jdk8?
> >>
> >> Does upgrading the management-server to 4.10 jdk8 and then keep the old
> >> VRs
> >> run for a while that run on JDK7 will still work ?
> >>
> >> Because If we upgrade the management-server to jdk8, we need to keep VR
> to
> >> work until they get upgraded but we can't force an upgrade of VR just
> >> because the management-server is now using JDK8.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >>
> >
> >
>

Re: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Will Stevens]

Regarding my question. Is it because of the version of Java that the
systemvm.iso is built on?

On Feb 20, 2017 11:58 AM, "Will Stevens"  wrote:

> A question that is hidden in here is:
> - Why does the JDK version on the management server have to match the JDK
> version of the System VM?
>
> *Will STEVENS*
> Lead Developer
>
> 
>
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> In the context of deployment of CloudStack with VPCs,
>> What will happen to a cloud when upgrading to 4.10 that now use jdk8?
>>
>> Does upgrading the management-server to 4.10 jdk8 and then keep the old
>> VRs
>> run for a while that run on JDK7 will still work ?
>>
>> Because If we upgrade the management-server to jdk8, we need to keep VR to
>> work until they get upgraded but we can't force an upgrade of VR just
>> because the management-server is now using JDK8.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>
>

Re: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Ron Wheeler]

Are any Java enhancements being added to common libraries that would 
force the Client side to have to run Java 8?
Would running Java 7 cause any library to need to be available in 2 
versions?


Ron

On 20/02/2017 11:58 AM, Will Stevens wrote:

A question that is hidden in here is:
- Why does the JDK version on the management server have to match the JDK
version of the System VM?

*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer



On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion 
wrote:


Hi,

In the context of deployment of CloudStack with VPCs,
What will happen to a cloud when upgrading to 4.10 that now use jdk8?

Does upgrading the management-server to 4.10 jdk8 and then keep the old VRs
run for a while that run on JDK7 will still work ?

Because If we upgrade the management-server to jdk8, we need to keep VR to
work until they get upgraded but we can't force an upgrade of VR just
because the management-server is now using JDK8.

Thanks,




--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102

Re: [QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Will Stevens]

A question that is hidden in here is:
- Why does the JDK version on the management server have to match the JDK
version of the System VM?

*Will STEVENS*
Lead Developer



On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> In the context of deployment of CloudStack with VPCs,
> What will happen to a cloud when upgrading to 4.10 that now use jdk8?
>
> Does upgrading the management-server to 4.10 jdk8 and then keep the old VRs
> run for a while that run on JDK7 will still work ?
>
> Because If we upgrade the management-server to jdk8, we need to keep VR to
> work until they get upgraded but we can't force an upgrade of VR just
> because the management-server is now using JDK8.
>
> Thanks,
>

[QUESTION] Upgrade path to JDK8

[Pierre-Luc Dion]

Hi,

In the context of deployment of CloudStack with VPCs,
What will happen to a cloud when upgrading to 4.10 that now use jdk8?

Does upgrading the management-server to 4.10 jdk8 and then keep the old VRs
run for a while that run on JDK7 will still work ?

Because If we upgrade the management-server to jdk8, we need to keep VR to
work until they get upgraded but we can't force an upgrade of VR just
because the management-server is now using JDK8.

Thanks,

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[syed]

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951#discussion_r101851324
  
--- Diff: setup/db/db/schema-4920to4930.sql ---
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+-- Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
+-- or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
+-- distributed with this work for additional information
+-- regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
+-- to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
+-- "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
+-- with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
+--
+--   http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+--
+-- Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
+-- software distributed under the License is distributed on an
+-- "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
+-- KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
+-- specific language governing permissions and limitations
+-- under the License.
+
+--;
+-- Schema upgrade from 4.9.2.0 to 4.9.3.0;
+--;
+
+INSERT IGNORE INTO `cloud`.`hypervisor_capabilities`(uuid, 
hypervisor_type, hypervisor_version, max_guests_limit, max_data_volumes_limit, 
storage_motion_supported) values (UUID(), 'XenServer', '7.0.0', 500, 13, 1);
--- End diff --

@rhtyd I thought that this would be in the 4.9.2.0->4.9.3.0 path which is a 
subset to the 4.10.0.0 path. So in theory, it should be only executed once 
correct?


---
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 issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[borisstoyanov]

Github user borisstoyanov commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
Just want to confirm it fresh installs and upgrades the DB to 4.9.3. will 
cancel the run after as I'm planning to do an upgrade scenario as well. 
Thanks @rhtyd 


---
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 issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
@borisstoyanov an explicit integration test is not necessary if Travis 
passes, since all changes are around db upgrade/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 issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
@borisstoyanov a Trillian-Jenkins test job (centos7 mgmt + kvm-centos7) has 
been kicked to run smoke tests


---
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 issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[borisstoyanov]

Github user borisstoyanov commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
@blueorangutan test


---
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 issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
Packaging result: ✔centos6 ✔centos7 ✔debian. JID-504


---
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 issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
@borisstoyanov a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep 
you posted as I make progress.


---
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 issue #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[borisstoyanov]

Github user borisstoyanov commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951
  
@blueorangutan package


---
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 #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[rhtyd]

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951#discussion_r101735670
  
--- Diff: setup/db/db/schema-4920to4930.sql ---
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
+-- Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
+-- or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
+-- distributed with this work for additional information
+-- regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
+-- to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
+-- "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
+-- with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
+--
+--   http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+--
+-- Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
+-- software distributed under the License is distributed on an
+-- "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
+-- KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
+-- specific language governing permissions and limitations
+-- under the License.
+
+--;
+-- Schema upgrade from 4.9.2.0 to 4.9.3.0;
+--;
+
+INSERT IGNORE INTO `cloud`.`hypervisor_capabilities`(uuid, 
hypervisor_type, hypervisor_version, max_guests_limit, max_data_volumes_limit, 
storage_motion_supported) values (UUID(), 'XenServer', '7.0.0', 500, 13, 1);
--- End diff --

Note: On fwd merging, this can be re-executed in 4.9.2.0->4.10.0.0 upgrade 
path.


---
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 #1951: CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

[rhtyd]

GitHub user rhtyd opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951

CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

This adds an upgrade path from 4.9.2.0 to 4.9.3.0, this also includes 
changes from PR https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1928 that adds 
missing hypervisor capability in 4.9/4.10+. This also fixes a db-cleanup path 
sequence issues, with that puts 4.10 after 4.1.0, and before 4.2.0.

Once validated I can help merge this on master, since this will cause merge 
conflicts on fwd-merging.

Ping - @syed @karuturi @borisstoyanov @DaanHoogland @abhinandanprateek 

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

$ git pull https://github.com/shapeblue/cloudstack 4930-upgradepath

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1951.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 #1951


commit 8d876206d46fdbce7a5247df0447abf6b9764221
Author: Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>
Date:   2017-02-17T11:02:10Z

CLOUDSTACK-9792: Add upgrade path for 4.9.3.0

Signed-off-by: Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>




---
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 #1851: schema: Upgrade path from 4.9.1.0 to 4.9.2.0

[asfgit]

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1851


---
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 issue #1851: schema: Upgrade path from 4.9.1.0 to 4.9.2.0

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1851
  
Tested this manually. Merging this on discretion.


---
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 #1851: schema: Upgrade path from 4.9.1.0 to 4.9.2.0

[rhtyd]

GitHub user rhtyd opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1851

schema: Upgrade path from 4.9.1.0 to 4.9.2.0

Upgrade paths added so PRs such as #1711 can use it.

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

$ git pull https://github.com/shapeblue/cloudstack 4910to4920upgradepath

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1851.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 #1851


commit a98d603e0fabe203e4588466d63c85c8a59def6e
Author: Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>
Date:   2016-12-22T04:40:32Z

schema: Upgrade path from 4.9.1.0 to 4.9.2.0

Signed-off-by: Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>




---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
Fwd-merged this to master, with db version on master fixed during merge 
conflict to 4.10.0.0-SNAPSHOT, and db paths fixed as 4.9.0->4.9.1->4.10.0.


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
Packaging result: ✔centos6 ✔centos7 ✔debian repo: 
http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/pr/1646
Job ID-100


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
@rhtyd a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you 
posted as I make progress.


---
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 #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9....

[asfgit]

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
Given we've enough reviews and tests (Travis) passing, I'll go ahead merge 
this and merge this fwd to master. On master, I'll send another PR that changes 
code version to 4.10.0.0-SNAPSHOT.


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
@jburwell yes that and we can also verify from packages that the version is 
reflected in the pkg names.


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[karuturi]

Github user karuturi commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
code LGTM


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[jburwell]

Github user jburwell commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
@rhtyd I understand the reasoning for two commits, and it makes sense.  
Since you understand the process required for the forward merge, I think it 
makes sense for you to perform it.

LGTM for code.

@karuturi @swill @wido are you able to provide a test LGTM?  This PR is a 
blocker for cutting the 4.9.1.0 release candidate.


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
@jburwell I've kept the changes into two commits (1) for pom.xml related 
version changes and (2) for db upgrade path, as when doing fwd-merging this 
will cause conflict with other pom files so on fwd-merging we can use a merging 
strategy to pick changes on (ours) master for the pom related changes while 
take the db upgrade path changes. I'll further require to fix the upgrade path 
on master branch to be like --> 4.9.0->4.9.1(.0)->4.10.0(.0) which is right now 
set as 4.9.0->4.10.0. I can also help with doing the fwd-merging so you can 
avoid dealing with the conflicts yourself.


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[jburwell]

Github user jburwell commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
@rhtyd could you please squash the commits?


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
Packaging result: ✔centos6 ✔centos7 ✔debian repo: 
http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/pr/1646
Job ID-91


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
@rhtyd a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you 
posted as I make progress.


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1, chan...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
@blueorangutan package


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
@jburwell @karuturi fixed.


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
@jburwell this makes sense, I'll update the PR and also fix this on master. 
Regarding 4.8 branch, I'm not sure so I'll ask @swill -- Will can you run 
setnextversion.sh on 4.8 branch to say 4.8.3.0-SNAPSHOT ?


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1

[jburwell]

Github user jburwell commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
@rhtyd we are moving to four position to version numbers to support our 
recent security release change where the fourth position is used to reflect 
security patch.  Therefore, the (release 
schedule)[https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/%5BPROPOSAL%5D+2016-2017+Release+Cycle+and+Calendar]
 designates the next release as 4.9.1.0.  Could you please update the POMs to 
reflect the fourth position?  We also need this change made for master 
(4.10.0.0) and 4.8 (4.8.2.0).


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
Packaging result: ✔centos6 ✔centos7 ✔debian repo: 
http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/pr/1646
Job ID-90


---
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 issue #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1

[blueorangutan]

Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646
  
@rhtyd a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you 
posted as I make progress.


---
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 #1646: [4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9....

[rhtyd]

GitHub user rhtyd opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646

[4.9/LTS] Add upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1

This adds db upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1 and fixes a typo in default 
user role description (CLOUDSTACK-9449)

/cc @karuturi @jburwell  -- this will cause issues when fwd-merged to 
master, I can do the fwd-merging if you would like to avoid fixing the 
conflicts yourself

@blueorangutan package

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

$ git pull https://github.com/shapeblue/cloudstack 4.9-491upgradepath

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1646.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 #1646


commit c2512b675463cb978995912978a3e687e1bb8acb
Author: Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>
Date:   2016-08-18T09:40:09Z

cloudstack: upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1

- Adds db upgrade path from 4.9.0 to 4.9.1
- CLOUDSTACK-9449: Fix typo in default user role description

Signed-off-by: Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>

commit 72aaf07fc6fc66fbb067afa569806e0a17649d9f
Author: Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>
Date:   2016-08-18T09:45:24Z

Updating pom.xml version numbers for release 4.9.1-SNAPSHOT

Signed-off-by: Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>




---
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: engine/schema: fix upgrade path to work w...

[asfgit]

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1517


---
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: engine/schema: fix upgrade path to work w...

[swill]

Github user swill commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1517#issuecomment-215077801
  
Thanks for the validation discussion.  I think this is ready...


---
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: engine/schema: fix upgrade path to work w...

[koushik-das]

Github user koushik-das commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1517#issuecomment-215038164
  
@rhtyd Thats right, setup will anyway do the upgrades.


---
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: engine/schema: fix upgrade path to work w...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1517#issuecomment-215024033
  
Thanks @koushik-das 
CI will be able to test it though as cloudstack-setup-database deploys 4.0 
schema and ACS mgmt server upgrades it or DatabaseUpgrader runs the upgrade 
path as well. Travis deployed database and is green confirms upgrade path fix 
does not break with existing MySQL 5.6 or less 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: engine/schema: fix upgrade path to work w...

[koushik-das]

Github user koushik-das commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1517#issuecomment-215017916
  
Code changes LGTM.
@swill The change is in upgrade code and CI won't be able to test it. So I 
think this can be merged.


---
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: engine/schema: fix upgrade path to work w...

[wido]

Github user wido commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1517#issuecomment-214852970
  
Ah, yes, I see @rhtyd !

LGTM


---
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: engine/schema: fix upgrade path to work w...

[rhtyd]

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1517#discussion_r61145609
  
--- Diff: engine/schema/src/com/cloud/upgrade/dao/Upgrade410to420.java ---
@@ -1297,7 +1297,7 @@ private void addHostDetailsIndex(Connection conn) {
 s_logger.debug("Index already exists on host_details - 
not adding new one");
--- End diff --

@wido the index is not added, if you look at the code above ^^ the if 
statement to check if index already exists with given key name and it only adds 
the index if it does not exist otherwise skips.


---
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: engine/schema: fix upgrade path to work w...

[wido]

Github user wido commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1517#issuecomment-214734875
  
So what happens if the Index already exists?


---
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: engine/schema: fix upgrade path to work w...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1517#issuecomment-214617500
  
@jburwell I've not tested, but if it is using/enforcing SQL99 it should 
fail too (or it could be mysql 5.7.4+ issue);

"As of MySQL 5.7.4, the IGNORE clause for ALTER TABLE is removed and its 
use produces an error."
from http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.7/en/alter-table.html




---
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: engine/schema: fix upgrade path to work w...

[jburwell]

Github user jburwell commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1517#issuecomment-214574233
  
Do these instructions apply to MariaDB as well?


---
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: engine/schema: fix upgrade path to work w...

[rhtyd]

Github user rhtyd commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1517#issuecomment-214229683
  
I found this article by Oracle MySQL team useful: 
https://www.digitalocean.com/community/tutorials/how-to-prepare-for-your-mysql-5-7-upgrade


---
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: [4.6.1/4.7.0] Database upgrade path issues/forks between 4.6.0/4.6.1 and 4.7.0/master

[Daan Hoogland]

Rohit, First of all good catch. I think we need to remove the 460to470 step
and have the path always pass by 4.6.1. Are you busy with this change
already?

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>
wrote:

> There seems to be a db view related change between 4.6.0 and 4.6.1 (DB)
> versions; and there exists separate DB upgrade paths from 4.6.0 to 4.7.0
> and 4.6.1 to 4.7.0 on master branch which shares the same changes. The
> issue is that the upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4.7.0 does not include the db
> view related changes that exists in the 4.6.0 to 4.6.1 upgrade path.
>
> While unlikely, but please share if this was done on purpose (i.e. we
> don’t want that db view related change if some user is upgrading from 4.6.0
> to 4.7.0), in which case it’s a non-issue.
>
> I’ll try to send a PR that *ought* to be merged on master before we freeze
> master (for 4.7.0) or cut a RC, but if I’m unable to do so today — someone
> please help fix this, and also refactor code (since there is a lot of
> common code), and don’t proceed without fixing this issue.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Rohit Yadav
> *Software Architect*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> * S: +44 20 3603 0540 <+442036030540> | M: +91 88 262 30892
> <+447770745036>  rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> <steve.ro...@shapeblue.com> | www.shapeblue.com
> <http://www.shapeblue.com/> | Twitter:@ShapeBlue
> <https://twitter.com/#!/shapeblue> 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
> <http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework <http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
> CloudStack Consulting <http://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.
>



-- 
Daan

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: 4.6.0 upgrade path is to pass 4.6.1 to cr...

[DaanHoogland]

GitHub user DaanHoogland opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1173

4.6.0 upgrade path is to pass 4.6.1 to create the extra view in there

test build done only

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

$ git pull https://github.com/DaanHoogland/cloudstack 4.7.0-upgrade-path

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1173.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 #1173


commit 3de117c8beafdfb9b602606715dc0694303b8f36
Author: Daan Hoogland <d...@onecht.net>
Date:   2015-12-04T09:06:19Z

4.6.0 upgrade path is to pass 4.6.1 to create the extra view 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.
---

Re: [4.6.1/4.7.0] Database upgrade path issues/forks between 4.6.0/4.6.1 and 4.7.0/master

[Daan Hoogland]

I gave it a quick shot. A test build is running and I'll create the pr in a
minute.

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 9:51 AM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>
wrote:

> Hi Daan, I’m testing quota but can work on it in 1-2 hours. So, not
> started yet but if you got time go ahead, and later I can help review/merge
> your PR.
>
> Regards.
>
> On 04-Dec-2015, at 2:15 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Rohit, First of all good catch. I think we need to remove the 460to470 step
> and have the path always pass by 4.6.1. Are you busy with this change
> already?
>
> On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Rohit Yadav <rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>
> wrote:
>
> There seems to be a db view related change between 4.6.0 and 4.6.1 (DB)
> versions; and there exists separate DB upgrade paths from 4.6.0 to 4.7.0
> and 4.6.1 to 4.7.0 on master branch which shares the same changes. The
> issue is that the upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4.7.0 does not include the db
> view related changes that exists in the 4.6.0 to 4.6.1 upgrade path.
>
> While unlikely, but please share if this was done on purpose (i.e. we
> don’t want that db view related change if some user is upgrading from 4.6.0
> to 4.7.0), in which case it’s a non-issue.
>
> I’ll try to send a PR that *ought* to be merged on master before we freeze
> master (for 4.7.0) or cut a RC, but if I’m unable to do so today — someone
> please help fix this, and also refactor code (since there is a lot of
> common code), and don’t proceed without fixing this issue.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Rohit Yadav
> *Software Architect*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> * S: +44 20 3603 0540 <+442036030540> | M: +91 88 262 30892
> <+447770745036>  rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> <steve.ro...@shapeblue.com> | www.shapeblue.com
> <http://www.shapeblue.com/> | Twitter:@ShapeBlue
> <https://twitter.com/#!/shapeblue> 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
> <http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework <http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
> CloudStack Consulting <http://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.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Daan
>
>
> Rohit Yadav
> *Software Architect*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> * S: +44 20 3603 0540 <+442036030540> | M: +91 88 262 30892
> <+447770745036>  rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> <steve.ro...@shapeblue.com> | www.shapeblue.com
> <http://www.shapeblue.com/> | Twitter:@ShapeBlue
> <https://twitter.com/#!/shapeblue> 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
> <http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework <http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
> CloudStack Consulting <http://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 

Re: [4.6.1/4.7.0] Database upgrade path issues/forks between 4.6.0/4.6.1 and 4.7.0/master

[Rohit Yadav]

Hi Daan, I’m testing quota but can work on it in 1-2 hours. So, not started yet 
but if you got time go ahead, and later I can help review/merge your PR.

Regards.

On 04-Dec-2015, at 2:15 PM, Daan Hoogland 
<daan.hoogl...@gmail.com<mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Rohit, First of all good catch. I think we need to remove the 460to470 step
and have the path always pass by 4.6.1. Are you busy with this change
already?

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 6:03 AM, Rohit Yadav 
<rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com<mailto:rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>>
wrote:

There seems to be a db view related change between 4.6.0 and 4.6.1 (DB)
versions; and there exists separate DB upgrade paths from 4.6.0 to 4.7.0
and 4.6.1 to 4.7.0 on master branch which shares the same changes. The
issue is that the upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4.7.0 does not include the db
view related changes that exists in the 4.6.0 to 4.6.1 upgrade path.

While unlikely, but please share if this was done on purpose (i.e. we
don’t want that db view related change if some user is upgrading from 4.6.0
to 4.7.0), in which case it’s a non-issue.

I’ll try to send a PR that *ought* to be merged on master before we freeze
master (for 4.7.0) or cut a RC, but if I’m unable to do so today — someone
please help fix this, and also refactor code (since there is a lot of
common code), and don’t proceed without fixing this issue.

Thanks.

Rohit Yadav
*Software Architect*







* S: +44 20 3603 0540 <+442036030540> | M: +91 88 262 30892
<+447770745036>  rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com<mailto:rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>
<steve.ro...@shapeblue.com<mailto:steve.ro...@shapeblue.com>> | 
www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com/>
<http://www.shapeblue.com/> | Twitter:@ShapeBlue
<https://twitter.com/#!/shapeblue> 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
<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework <http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
CloudStack Consulting <http://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.




--
Daan

Rohit Yadav
Software Architect

[cid:image003.png@01D122E8.F6EFE910]



S: +44 20 3603 0540<tel:+442036030540> | M: +91 88 262 30892<tel:+447770745036>

rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com<mailto:steve.ro...@shapeblue.com> | 
www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com/> | 
Twitter:@ShapeBlue<https://twitter.com/#!/shapeblue>

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<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
CloudStack Consulting<http://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. Sha

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: 4.6.0 upgrade path is to pass 4.6.1 to cr...

[bhaisaab]

Github user bhaisaab commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1173#issuecomment-161929046
  
LGTM, thanks @DaanHoogland for fixing this so fast


---
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: 4.6.0 upgrade path is to pass 4.6.1 to cr...

[bhaisaab]

Github user bhaisaab commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1173#issuecomment-161929234
  
once merged on master, I'll rebase quota-master branch (the quota PR) with 
latest master and then fix it's db upgrade paths.


---
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: 4.6.0 upgrade path is to pass 4.6.1 to cr...

[pdube]

Github user pdube commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1173#issuecomment-161987586
  
LGTM by code review. 


---
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: 4.6.0 upgrade path is to pass 4.6.1 to cr...

[ustcweizhou]

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1173#discussion_r46694480
  
--- Diff: setup/db/db/schema-460to470.sql ---
@@ -1,32 +0,0 @@
--- Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
--- or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
--- distributed with this work for additional information
--- regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
--- to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
--- "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
--- with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
---
---   http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
---
--- Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
--- software distributed under the License is distributed on an
--- "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
--- KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
--- specific language governing permissions and limitations
--- under the License.
-
---;
--- Schema upgrade from 4.6.0 to 4.7.0;
---;
-
-CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `cloud`.`domain_vlan_map` (
--- End diff --

@DaanHoogland I added it to both 460to470 and 461to470


---
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: 4.6.0 upgrade path is to pass 4.6.1 to cr...

[pdube]

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1173#discussion_r46685020
  
--- Diff: setup/db/db/schema-460to470.sql ---
@@ -1,32 +0,0 @@
--- Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
--- or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
--- distributed with this work for additional information
--- regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
--- to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
--- "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
--- with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
---
---   http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
---
--- Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
--- software distributed under the License is distributed on an
--- "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
--- KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
--- specific language governing permissions and limitations
--- under the License.
-
---;
--- Schema upgrade from 4.6.0 to 4.7.0;
---;
-
-CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `cloud`.`domain_vlan_map` (
--- End diff --

Is this in the 4.6.0 to 4.6.1?


---
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: 4.6.0 upgrade path is to pass 4.6.1 to cr...

[ustcweizhou]

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1173#discussion_r46686423
  
--- Diff: setup/db/db/schema-460to470.sql ---
@@ -1,32 +0,0 @@
--- Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
--- or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
--- distributed with this work for additional information
--- regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
--- to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
--- "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
--- with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
---
---   http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
---
--- Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
--- software distributed under the License is distributed on an
--- "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
--- KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
--- specific language governing permissions and limitations
--- under the License.
-
---;
--- Schema upgrade from 4.6.0 to 4.7.0;
---;
-
-CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `cloud`.`domain_vlan_map` (
--- End diff --

yes


---
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: 4.6.0 upgrade path is to pass 4.6.1 to cr...

[DaanHoogland]

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1173#discussion_r46687151
  
--- Diff: setup/db/db/schema-460to470.sql ---
@@ -1,32 +0,0 @@
--- Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
--- or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
--- distributed with this work for additional information
--- regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
--- to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
--- "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
--- with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
---
---   http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
---
--- Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
--- software distributed under the License is distributed on an
--- "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
--- KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
--- specific language governing permissions and limitations
--- under the License.
-
---;
--- Schema upgrade from 4.6.0 to 4.7.0;
---;
-
-CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `cloud`.`domain_vlan_map` (
--- End diff --

actually it is in schema-461to470


---
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: 4.6.0 upgrade path is to pass 4.6.1 to cr...

[bhaisaab]

Github user bhaisaab commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1173#issuecomment-162030722
  
Merging now, that we've enough LGTMs.


---
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: 4.6.0 upgrade path is to pass 4.6.1 to cr...

[asfgit]

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1173


---
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: 4.6.0 upgrade path is to pass 4.6.1 to cr...

[DaanHoogland]

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1173#discussion_r46698656
  
--- Diff: setup/db/db/schema-460to470.sql ---
@@ -1,32 +0,0 @@
--- Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
--- or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
--- distributed with this work for additional information
--- regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
--- to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
--- "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
--- with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
---
---   http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
---
--- Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
--- software distributed under the License is distributed on an
--- "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
--- KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
--- specific language governing permissions and limitations
--- under the License.
-
---;
--- Schema upgrade from 4.6.0 to 4.7.0;
---;
-
-CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS `cloud`.`domain_vlan_map` (
--- End diff --

@ustcweizhou 460to470 is to be removed. all upgrades wil go 4.6.0 -> 4.6.1 
-> 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.
---

[4.6.1/4.7.0] Database upgrade path issues/forks between 4.6.0/4.6.1 and 4.7.0/master

[Rohit Yadav]

There seems to be a db view related change between 4.6.0 and 4.6.1 (DB) 
versions; and there exists separate DB upgrade paths from 4.6.0 to 4.7.0 and 
4.6.1 to 4.7.0 on master branch which shares the same changes. The issue is 
that the upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4.7.0 does not include the db view related 
changes that exists in the 4.6.0 to 4.6.1 upgrade path.

While unlikely, but please share if this was done on purpose (i.e. we don’t 
want that db view related change if some user is upgrading from 4.6.0 to 
4.7.0), in which case it’s a non-issue.

I’ll try to send a PR that *ought* to be merged on master before we freeze 
master (for 4.7.0) or cut a RC, but if I’m unable to do so today — someone 
please help fix this, and also refactor code (since there is a lot of common 
code), and don’t proceed without fixing this issue.

Thanks.

Rohit Yadav
Software Architect

[cid:image003.png@01D122E8.F6EFE910]



S: +44 20 3603 0540<tel:+442036030540> | M: +91 88 262 30892<tel:+447770745036>
rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com<mailto:steve.ro...@shapeblue.com> | 
www.shapeblue.com<http://www.shapeblue.com/> | 
Twitter:@ShapeBlue<https://twitter.com/#!/shapeblue>
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<http://shapeblue.com/iaas-cloud-design-and-build//>
CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<http://shapeblue.com/csforge/>
CloudStack Consulting<http://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.

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: implemented upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4....

[DaanHoogland]

Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1067#issuecomment-156813885
  
merged with 4.6 branch and:
```
INFO  [c.c.s.ManagementServerImpl] (main:ctx-1c73e37e) Startup CloudStack 
management server...
INFO  [c.c.c.ClusterManagerImpl] (main:ctx-1c73e37e) register cluster 
listener class com.cloud.server.LockMasterListener
INFO  [c.c.c.ClusterManagerImpl] (Cluster-Heartbeat-1:ctx-62e492b0) We are 
good, no orphan management server msid in host table is found
INFO  [c.c.c.ClusterManagerImpl] (Cluster-Heartbeat-1:ctx-62e492b0) No 
inactive management server node found
WARN  [o.a.c.alerts] (Cluster-Notification-1:ctx-7db732cd)  alertType:: 14 
// dataCenterId:: 0 // podId:: 0 // clusterId:: null // message:: Management 
server node 127.0.0.1 is up
WARN  [c.c.c.ClusterManagerImpl] (Cluster-Notification-1:ctx-7db732cd) 
Notifying management server join event took 9 ms
```
LGTM


---
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: implemented upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4....

[remibergsma]

Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1067#issuecomment-156820839
  
This is an upgrade from 4.6.0 to 4.6.1:

```
INFO  [o.a.c.s.l.CloudStackExtendedLifeCycle] (main:null) Running system 
integrity checker com.cloud.upgrade.DatabaseUpgradeChecker@419c5949
INFO  [c.c.u.DatabaseUpgradeChecker] (main:null) Grabbing lock to check for 
database upgrade.
INFO  [c.c.u.DatabaseUpgradeChecker] (main:null) DB version = 4.6.0 Code 
Version = 4.6.1-SNAPSHOT
INFO  [c.c.u.DatabaseUpgradeChecker] (main:null) Database upgrade must be 
performed from 4.6.0 to 4.6.1-SNAPSHOT
INFO  [c.c.u.DatabaseUpgradeChecker] (main:null) Cleaning upgrades because 
all management server are now at the same version
INFO  [c.c.u.DatabaseUpgradeChecker] (main:null) Cleanup upgrade 
Upgrade460to461 to upgrade from 4.6.0-4.6.1 to 4.6.1
INFO  [o.a.c.s.l.CloudStackExtendedLifeCycle] (main:null) Configuring 
CloudStack Components
```

The database shows:
```

MariaDB [cloud]> select * from version;
++-+-+--+
| id | version | updated | step |
++-+-+--+
|  1 | 4.0.0   | 2015-11-06 13:33:14 | Complete |
|  2 | 4.1.0   | 2015-11-06 13:33:25 | Complete |
|  3 | 4.2.0   | 2015-11-06 13:33:25 | Complete |
|  4 | 4.2.1   | 2015-11-06 13:33:25 | Complete |
|  5 | 4.3.0   | 2015-11-06 13:33:25 | Complete |
|  6 | 4.4.0   | 2015-11-06 13:33:26 | Complete |
|  7 | 4.4.1   | 2015-11-06 13:33:26 | Complete |
|  8 | 4.4.2   | 2015-11-06 13:33:26 | Complete |
|  9 | 4.5.0   | 2015-11-06 13:33:26 | Complete |
| 10 | 4.5.1   | 2015-11-06 13:33:26 | Complete |
| 11 | 4.5.2   | 2015-11-06 13:33:26 | Complete |
| 12 | 4.6.0   | 2015-11-06 13:33:26 | Complete |
| 13 | 4.6.1   | 2015-11-15 15:38:58 | Complete |
++-+-+--+
13 rows in set (0.00 sec)
```

I'd say this works as expected :-)

Pinging @DaanHoogland 


---
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: implemented upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4....

[DaanHoogland]

Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1067#issuecomment-156821756
  
so, you have my lgtm, need a second one?



---
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: implemented upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4....

[remibergsma]

Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1067#issuecomment-156812719
  
@DaanHoogland I rebased it, as it needs the `checkstyle` fix in 4.6.


---
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: implemented upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4....

[remibergsma]

Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1067#issuecomment-156821894
  
Yes, let's stick to the rules :-)


---
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: implemented upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4....

[remibergsma]

GitHub user remibergsma opened a pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1067

implemented upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4.6.1

The 4.6 branch needs an upgrade path to 4.6.1. I looked at how this was 
done before and think this will do. Can you give it a second pair of eyes 
please @DaanHoogland ?

When this is indeed OK, I'll do the same for master for the 4.6.0 -> 4.7.0 
path.

I've tried a build and that works: `mvn clean install`
```
[INFO] 

[INFO] BUILD SUCCESS
[INFO] 

[INFO] Total time: 07:33 min
[INFO] Finished at: 2015-11-15T13:45:58+01:00
[INFO] Final Memory: 120M/1591M
[INFO] 

```

Once this is a PR, I'll try an actual upgrade from 4.6.0 to 4.6.1-SNAPSHOT.

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

$ git pull https://github.com/remibergsma/cloudstack 460_461_upgrade_path

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1067.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 #1067


commit 7536fb125d79217e5326ff138423142afe5d14b0
Author: Remi Bergsma <git...@remi.nl>
Date:   2015-11-15T12:30:43Z

implemented upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4.6.1




---
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: implemented upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4....

[DaanHoogland]

Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1067#issuecomment-156810107
  
looks good, let's run a test anyway. the jenkins should run it but it it's 
running on a INFRA-10703 host so it will most likely fail.


---
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: implement upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4.6....

[milamberspace]

Github user milamberspace commented on the pull request:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1067#issuecomment-156846865
  
LGTM
Works on my test deployment.

2015-11-15 19:52:41,711 DEBUG [c.c.u.DatabaseUpgradeChecker] (main:null) 
Cleanup script 
/usr/share/cloudstack-management/setup/db/schema-460to461-cleanup.sql is 
executed successfully
2015-11-15 19:52:41,736 DEBUG [c.c.u.DatabaseUpgradeChecker] (main:null) 
Upgrade completed for version 4.6.1



---
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: implement upgrade path from 4.6.0 to 4.6....

[asfgit]

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1067


---
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-9046 - Fix upgrade path from 4...

[DaanHoogland]

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1050#discussion_r44281597
  
--- Diff: engine/schema/src/com/cloud/upgrade/dao/Upgrade452to460.java ---
@@ -165,4 +171,173 @@ private void addIndexForVMInstance(Connection conn) {
 return new File[] { new File(script) };
 }
 
+@SuppressWarnings("serial")
+private void updateSystemVmTemplates(final Connection conn) {
+s_logger.debug("Updating System Vm template IDs");
+// Get all hypervisors in use
+final Set hypervisorsListInUse = new 
HashSet();
+try (PreparedStatement pstmt = conn.prepareStatement("select 
distinct(hypervisor_type) from `cloud`.`cluster` where removed is null"); 
ResultSet rs = pstmt.executeQuery()) {
+while (rs.next()) {
+switch 
(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.getType(rs.getString(1))) {
+case XenServer:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.XenServer);
+break;
+case KVM:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.KVM);
+break;
+case VMware:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.VMware);
+break;
+case Hyperv:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Hyperv);
+break;
+case LXC:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.LXC);
+break;
+case Ovm3:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Ovm3);
+break;
+default: // no action on cases Any, BareMetal, None, Ovm,
+// Parralels, Simulator and VirtualBox:
+break;
+}
+}
+} catch (final SQLException e) {
+s_logger.error("updateSystemVmTemplates:Exception while 
getting hypervisor types from clusters: " + e.getMessage());
+throw new 
CloudRuntimeException("updateSystemVmTemplates:Exception while getting 
hypervisor types from clusters", e);
+}
+
+final Map NewTemplateNameList = 
new HashMap() {
+{
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.XenServer, 
"systemvm-xenserver-4.6");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.VMware, 
"systemvm-vmware-4.6");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.KVM, "systemvm-kvm-4.6");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.LXC, "systemvm-lxc-4.6");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Hyperv, 
"systemvm-hyperv-4.6");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Ovm3, "systemvm-ovm3-4.6");
+}
+};
+
+final Map 
routerTemplateConfigurationNames = new HashMap() {
+{
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.XenServer, 
"router.template.xenserver");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.VMware, 
"router.template.vmware");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.KVM, "router.template.kvm");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.LXC, "router.template.lxc");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Hyperv, 
"router.template.hyperv");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Ovm3, 
"router.template.ovm3");
+}
+};
+
+final Map newTemplateUrl = new 
HashMap() {
+{
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.XenServer, 
"http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/systemvm/4.6/systemvm64template-4.6.0-xen.vhd.bz2;);
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.VMware, 
"http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/systemvm/4.6/systemvm64template-4.6.0-vmware.ova;);
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.KVM, 
"http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/systemvm/4.6/systemvm64template-4.6.0-kvm.qcow2.bz2;);
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.LXC, 
"http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/systemvm/4.6/systemvm64template-4.6.0-kvm.qcow2.bz2;);
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Hyperv, 
"http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/systemvm/4.6/systemvm64template-4.6.0-hyperv.vhd.zip;);
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Ovm3, 
"http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/systemvm/4.6/systemvm64template-4.6.0-ovm.raw.bz2;);
+}
+};
+
+final Map newTemplateChecksum = 
new HashMap() {

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9046 - Fix upgrade path from 4...

[wilderrodrigues]

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1050#discussion_r44281769
  
--- Diff: engine/schema/src/com/cloud/upgrade/dao/Upgrade452to460.java ---
@@ -165,4 +171,173 @@ private void addIndexForVMInstance(Connection conn) {
 return new File[] { new File(script) };
 }
 
+@SuppressWarnings("serial")
+private void updateSystemVmTemplates(final Connection conn) {
+s_logger.debug("Updating System Vm template IDs");
+// Get all hypervisors in use
+final Set hypervisorsListInUse = new 
HashSet();
+try (PreparedStatement pstmt = conn.prepareStatement("select 
distinct(hypervisor_type) from `cloud`.`cluster` where removed is null"); 
ResultSet rs = pstmt.executeQuery()) {
+while (rs.next()) {
+switch 
(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.getType(rs.getString(1))) {
+case XenServer:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.XenServer);
+break;
+case KVM:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.KVM);
+break;
+case VMware:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.VMware);
+break;
+case Hyperv:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Hyperv);
+break;
+case LXC:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.LXC);
+break;
+case Ovm3:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Ovm3);
+break;
+default: // no action on cases Any, BareMetal, None, Ovm,
+// Parralels, Simulator and VirtualBox:
+break;
+}
+}
+} catch (final SQLException e) {
+s_logger.error("updateSystemVmTemplates:Exception while 
getting hypervisor types from clusters: " + e.getMessage());
+throw new 
CloudRuntimeException("updateSystemVmTemplates:Exception while getting 
hypervisor types from clusters", e);
+}
+
+final Map NewTemplateNameList = 
new HashMap() {
+{
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.XenServer, 
"systemvm-xenserver-4.6");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.VMware, 
"systemvm-vmware-4.6");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.KVM, "systemvm-kvm-4.6");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.LXC, "systemvm-lxc-4.6");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Hyperv, 
"systemvm-hyperv-4.6");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Ovm3, "systemvm-ovm3-4.6");
+}
+};
+
+final Map 
routerTemplateConfigurationNames = new HashMap() {
+{
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.XenServer, 
"router.template.xenserver");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.VMware, 
"router.template.vmware");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.KVM, "router.template.kvm");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.LXC, "router.template.lxc");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Hyperv, 
"router.template.hyperv");
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Ovm3, 
"router.template.ovm3");
+}
+};
+
+final Map newTemplateUrl = new 
HashMap() {
+{
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.XenServer, 
"http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/systemvm/4.6/systemvm64template-4.6.0-xen.vhd.bz2;);
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.VMware, 
"http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/systemvm/4.6/systemvm64template-4.6.0-vmware.ova;);
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.KVM, 
"http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/systemvm/4.6/systemvm64template-4.6.0-kvm.qcow2.bz2;);
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.LXC, 
"http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/systemvm/4.6/systemvm64template-4.6.0-kvm.qcow2.bz2;);
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Hyperv, 
"http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/systemvm/4.6/systemvm64template-4.6.0-hyperv.vhd.zip;);
+put(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Ovm3, 
"http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/systemvm/4.6/systemvm64template-4.6.0-ovm.raw.bz2;);
+}
+};
+
+final Map newTemplateChecksum = 
new HashMap() {
  

[GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-9046 - Fix upgrade path from 4...

[DaanHoogland]

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

https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1050#discussion_r44281795
  
--- Diff: engine/schema/src/com/cloud/upgrade/dao/Upgrade452to460.java ---
@@ -165,4 +171,173 @@ private void addIndexForVMInstance(Connection conn) {
 return new File[] { new File(script) };
 }
 
+@SuppressWarnings("serial")
+private void updateSystemVmTemplates(final Connection conn) {
+s_logger.debug("Updating System Vm template IDs");
+// Get all hypervisors in use
+final Set hypervisorsListInUse = new 
HashSet();
+try (PreparedStatement pstmt = conn.prepareStatement("select 
distinct(hypervisor_type) from `cloud`.`cluster` where removed is null"); 
ResultSet rs = pstmt.executeQuery()) {
+while (rs.next()) {
+switch 
(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.getType(rs.getString(1))) {
+case XenServer:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.XenServer);
+break;
+case KVM:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.KVM);
+break;
+case VMware:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.VMware);
+break;
+case Hyperv:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Hyperv);
+break;
+case LXC:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.LXC);
+break;
+case Ovm3:
+
hypervisorsListInUse.add(Hypervisor.HypervisorType.Ovm3);
+break;
+default: // no action on cases Any, BareMetal, None, Ovm,
+// Parralels, Simulator and VirtualBox:
+break;
+}
+}
+} catch (final SQLException e) {
+s_logger.error("updateSystemVmTemplates:Exception while 
getting hypervisor types from clusters: " + e.getMessage());
+throw new 
CloudRuntimeException("updateSystemVmTemplates:Exception while getting 
hypervisor types from clusters", e);
+}
+
+final Map NewTemplateNameList = 
new HashMap() {
--- End diff --

naming convention: var starting with capital


---
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.
---