RE: which version is more stable one to deploy ACS in production:
Hi Lucian, Thank you for your replay. Sorry for not mentioning hypervisor type in previous mail what I'm using is XenServer Hypervisor. So can you provide me the link to get SystemVM Template for XenServer hypervisor type. Thank you, Anil. -Original Message- From: Nux! [mailto:n...@li.nux.ro] Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2014 7:23 AM To: users@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: which version is more stable one to deploy ACS in production: Hello, You can get it from here: http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/systemvm/4.3/ HTH Lucian -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro - Original Message - > From: "Anil Kumar Lakineni" > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org > Sent: Thursday, 16 October, 2014 18:03:54 > Subject: RE: which version is more stable one to deploy ACS in production: > Hi All, > > Good Morning, I have configured ACS 4.3.1 and now I want to download SYSTEM > VM TEMPLATE to secondary storage. So can anyone provide me the link to > download ACS 4.3.1 system vm template..?? I'm Using xenserver hypervisor. > > if use ACS 4.3.0 system vm template download link, do I get any issues in > future..??? > > Looking forward for your suggestions. > > Thank you, > Anil. > > -Original Message- > From: ilya musayev [mailto:ilya.mailing.li...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 10:18 PM > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: which version is more stable one to deploy ACS in production: > > I run 4.3.1 and my environments are very large. I plan to stay on it for > a while. > > Depending on the size if you go into 100 hypervisors, you may want to > tweak java heap. > > On 10/6/14, 1:11 AM, AnilKumar Lakineni wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> Good Morning, >> >> I want to deploy ACS for production. So can anybody suggest me which > version should I take into production with more advanced features. >> >> Looking forward for your valuable suggestions. >> >> >> Thank you, >> Anil. >> > > > --- > This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus > protection > is active. > http://www.avast.com --- This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. http://www.avast.com
Re: which version is more stable one to deploy ACS in production:
Hello, You can get it from here: http://cloudstack.apt-get.eu/systemvm/4.3/ HTH Lucian -- Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! Nux! www.nux.ro - Original Message - > From: "Anil Kumar Lakineni" > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org > Sent: Thursday, 16 October, 2014 18:03:54 > Subject: RE: which version is more stable one to deploy ACS in production: > Hi All, > > Good Morning, I have configured ACS 4.3.1 and now I want to download SYSTEM > VM TEMPLATE to secondary storage. So can anyone provide me the link to > download ACS 4.3.1 system vm template..?? I'm Using xenserver hypervisor. > > if use ACS 4.3.0 system vm template download link, do I get any issues in > future..??? > > Looking forward for your suggestions. > > Thank you, > Anil. > > -Original Message- > From: ilya musayev [mailto:ilya.mailing.li...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2014 10:18 PM > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: which version is more stable one to deploy ACS in production: > > I run 4.3.1 and my environments are very large. I plan to stay on it for > a while. > > Depending on the size if you go into 100 hypervisors, you may want to > tweak java heap. > > On 10/6/14, 1:11 AM, AnilKumar Lakineni wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> Good Morning, >> >> I want to deploy ACS for production. So can anybody suggest me which > version should I take into production with more advanced features. >> >> Looking forward for your valuable suggestions. >> >> >> Thank you, >> Anil. >> > > > --- > This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus > protection > is active. > http://www.avast.com
Re: Problems Creating Templates in CloudStack 4.4
i think your initial problem was nfs being slow and timeout but when i looked at your logs i can see that dom0 on xenserver still using this volume hence your attempts are failing, i experienced the same issue and if you open xencenter you will see the mapping from dom0. Technically you need to unplug this VDI which i wasnt able to achieve since dom0 is a very special VM i think someone with experience on xenserver can explain both of us with the right command sequence so we can create template for this volume... Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 17, 2014, at 11:46 AM, "Sam Ceylani" wrote: > > there is a timeout setting in global configuration and you can increase the > timeout value from there, make sure you restart your management service, i > believe it is 10800 seconds, are you using nfs for secondary storage? which > sometimes can be slow due to all sync writes > > SC > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Oct 17, 2014, at 11:15 AM, "Alicia" wrote: >> >> I am unable to reliably create templates from volumes. The create >> template fails at various percentages complete and will fail multiple >> times before the template creates successfully. I am having this problem >> with multiple VMs. >> >> The error I receive in CloudStack is Failed to create templateCreating >> Template from volume 1a56fd0e-fea3-4423-9cf0-d0a45e4f2391 failed tue to >> java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException: NO event for task >> OpaqueRef:73321d08-95ae-c099-7591-810f20226a23. >> >> Below is what I see in my logs. Is this some kind of bug? >> >> Thanks, >> Alicia >> 2014-10-17 10:51:39,694 DEBUG [o.a.c.h.x.XenServerResourceNewBase] >> (DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Task: ref:OpaqueRef:73321d07-95ae-c099- >> 7591-810f30336a23, UUID:e5afcfba-89a7-d01f-26b2-3cf6c28c8809 progress: >> 0.15 >> 2014-10-17 10:51:39,703 WARN [o.a.c.h.x.XenServerResourceNewBase] >> (DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) No event for task OpaqueRef:73321d07- >> 95ae-c099-7591-810f30336a23 >> 2014-10-17 10:51:39,738 DEBUG [c.c.h.x.r.CitrixResourceBase] >> (DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Host 10.0.0.26 OpaqueRef:4b47b87a-e111- >> 55b2-be4c-316a0e5ece9e: Removing SR >> 2014-10-17 10:51:39,745 DEBUG [c.c.h.x.r.CitrixResourceBase] >> (DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Host 10.0.0.26 OpaqueRef:4b47b87a-e111- >> 55b2-be4c-316a0e5ece9e: Catch XenAPIException: This operation cannot be >> performed because this VDI is in use by some other operation >> 2014-10-17 10:51:39,752 DEBUG [c.c.h.x.r.CitrixResourceBase] >> (DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Host 10.0.0.26 OpaqueRef:4b47b87a-e111- >> 55b2-be4c-316a0e5ece9e: Catch XenAPIException: This operation cannot be >> performed because this VDI is in use by some other operation >> 2014-10-17 10:51:39,752 WARN [c.c.h.x.r.CitrixResourceBase] >> (DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Host 10.0.0.26 OpaqueRef:4b47b87a-e111- >> 55b2-be4c-316a0e5ece9e: Unable to remove SR >> 2014-10-17 10:51:40,787 ERROR [c.c.h.x.r.XenServerStorageProcessor] >> (DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Creating template from volume 1a56fd0e- >> fea3-4423-9cf0-d0a45e4f2391 failed due to >> java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException: No event for task >> OpaqueRef:73321d07-95ae-c099-7591-810f30336a23 >> java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException: No event for task >> OpaqueRef:73321d07-95ae-c099-7591-810f30336a23 >> at >> org.apache.cloudstack.hypervisor.xenserver.XenServerResourceNewBase.wait >> ForTask(XenServerResourceNewBase.java:124) >> at >> com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.Xenserver625StorageProcessor.createTem >> plateFromVolume(Xenserver625StorageProcessor.java:556) >> at >> com.cloud.storage.resource.StorageSubsystemCommandHandlerBase.execute(St >> orageSubsystemCommandHandlerBase.java:90) >> at >> com.cloud.storage.resource.StorageSubsystemCommandHandlerBase.handleStor >> ageCommands(StorageSubsystemCommandHandlerBase.java:52) >> at >> com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.CitrixResourceBase.executeRequest(Citr >> ixResourceBase.java:546) >> at >> com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.XenServer56Resource.executeRequest(Xen >> Server56Resource.java:61) >> at >> com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.XenServer610Resource.executeRequest(Xe >> nServer610Resource.java:102) >> at >> com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.XenServer620SP1Resource.executeRequest >> (XenServer620SP1Resource.java:65) >> at >> com.cloud.agent.manager.DirectAgentAttache$Task.runInContext(DirectAgent >> Attache.java:216) >> at >> org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(Manag >> edContextRunnable.java:49) >> at >> org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call( >> DefaultManagedContext.java:56) >> at >> org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWit >> hContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:103) >> at >> org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWith >> Context(DefaultManagedContext.java:53) >> at >> org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.
Re: Problems Creating Templates in CloudStack 4.4
there is a timeout setting in global configuration and you can increase the timeout value from there, make sure you restart your management service, i believe it is 10800 seconds, are you using nfs for secondary storage? which sometimes can be slow due to all sync writes SC Sent from my iPhone > On Oct 17, 2014, at 11:15 AM, "Alicia" wrote: > > I am unable to reliably create templates from volumes. The create > template fails at various percentages complete and will fail multiple > times before the template creates successfully. I am having this problem > with multiple VMs. > > The error I receive in CloudStack is Failed to create templateCreating > Template from volume 1a56fd0e-fea3-4423-9cf0-d0a45e4f2391 failed tue to > java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException: NO event for task > OpaqueRef:73321d08-95ae-c099-7591-810f20226a23. > > Below is what I see in my logs. Is this some kind of bug? > > Thanks, > Alicia > 2014-10-17 10:51:39,694 DEBUG [o.a.c.h.x.XenServerResourceNewBase] > (DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Task: ref:OpaqueRef:73321d07-95ae-c099- > 7591-810f30336a23, UUID:e5afcfba-89a7-d01f-26b2-3cf6c28c8809 progress: > 0.15 > 2014-10-17 10:51:39,703 WARN [o.a.c.h.x.XenServerResourceNewBase] > (DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) No event for task OpaqueRef:73321d07- > 95ae-c099-7591-810f30336a23 > 2014-10-17 10:51:39,738 DEBUG [c.c.h.x.r.CitrixResourceBase] > (DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Host 10.0.0.26 OpaqueRef:4b47b87a-e111- > 55b2-be4c-316a0e5ece9e: Removing SR > 2014-10-17 10:51:39,745 DEBUG [c.c.h.x.r.CitrixResourceBase] > (DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Host 10.0.0.26 OpaqueRef:4b47b87a-e111- > 55b2-be4c-316a0e5ece9e: Catch XenAPIException: This operation cannot be > performed because this VDI is in use by some other operation > 2014-10-17 10:51:39,752 DEBUG [c.c.h.x.r.CitrixResourceBase] > (DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Host 10.0.0.26 OpaqueRef:4b47b87a-e111- > 55b2-be4c-316a0e5ece9e: Catch XenAPIException: This operation cannot be > performed because this VDI is in use by some other operation > 2014-10-17 10:51:39,752 WARN [c.c.h.x.r.CitrixResourceBase] > (DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Host 10.0.0.26 OpaqueRef:4b47b87a-e111- > 55b2-be4c-316a0e5ece9e: Unable to remove SR > 2014-10-17 10:51:40,787 ERROR [c.c.h.x.r.XenServerStorageProcessor] > (DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Creating template from volume 1a56fd0e- > fea3-4423-9cf0-d0a45e4f2391 failed due to > java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException: No event for task > OpaqueRef:73321d07-95ae-c099-7591-810f30336a23 > java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException: No event for task > OpaqueRef:73321d07-95ae-c099-7591-810f30336a23 >at > org.apache.cloudstack.hypervisor.xenserver.XenServerResourceNewBase.wait > ForTask(XenServerResourceNewBase.java:124) >at > com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.Xenserver625StorageProcessor.createTem > plateFromVolume(Xenserver625StorageProcessor.java:556) >at > com.cloud.storage.resource.StorageSubsystemCommandHandlerBase.execute(St > orageSubsystemCommandHandlerBase.java:90) >at > com.cloud.storage.resource.StorageSubsystemCommandHandlerBase.handleStor > ageCommands(StorageSubsystemCommandHandlerBase.java:52) >at > com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.CitrixResourceBase.executeRequest(Citr > ixResourceBase.java:546) >at > com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.XenServer56Resource.executeRequest(Xen > Server56Resource.java:61) >at > com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.XenServer610Resource.executeRequest(Xe > nServer610Resource.java:102) >at > com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.XenServer620SP1Resource.executeRequest > (XenServer620SP1Resource.java:65) >at > com.cloud.agent.manager.DirectAgentAttache$Task.runInContext(DirectAgent > Attache.java:216) >at > org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(Manag > edContextRunnable.java:49) >at > org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call( > DefaultManagedContext.java:56) >at > org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWit > hContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:103) >at > org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWith > Context(DefaultManagedContext.java:53) >at > org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(Managed > ContextRunnable.java:46) >at > java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471) >at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262) >at > java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.acc > ess$201(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:178) >at > java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run > (ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:292) >at > java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.jav > a:1145) >at > java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.ja > va:615) >at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745) > 2014-10-17 10
Initial install issues
Installed on Ubuntu 14.04 TLS followed this guide: https://joshuarogers.net/installing-cloudstack-43-ubuntu-1404 I'm very new to the product (first time trying to play with it). When I try to open http://localhost:8080 it gives me a blank screen (nothing) no time out, just a blank screen. Here is my listening ports: sudo netstat -ntlp | grep LISTEN sudo: unable to resolve host srvr1.cloud.priv [sudo] password for sgabriel: tcp0 0 0.0.0.0:111 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 655/rpcbind tcp0 0 127.0.1.1:530.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1075/dnsmasq tcp0 0 0.0.0.0:60085 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 722/rpc.statd tcp0 0 0.0.0.0:22 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 906/sshd tcp0 0 127.0.0.1:631 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 485/cupsd tcp0 0 0.0.0.0:892 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1773/rpc.mountd tcp0 0 0.0.0.0:20490.0.0.0:* LISTEN - tcp0 0 0.0.0.0:32803 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN - tcp0 0 127.0.0.1:3306 0.0.0.0:* LISTEN 1115/mysqld tcp6 0 0 :::111 :::*LISTEN 655/rpcbind tcp6 0 0 :::20400:::*LISTEN 1057/jsvc.exec tcp6 0 0 :::8080 :::*LISTEN 1057/jsvc.exec tcp6 0 0 :::22 :::*LISTEN 906/sshd tcp6 0 0 :::51002:::*LISTEN 722/rpc.statd tcp6 0 0 :::892 :::*LISTEN 1773/rpc.mountd tcp6 0 0 :::59295:::*LISTEN 1057/jsvc.exec tcp6 0 0 :::2049 :::*LISTEN - tcp6 0 0 :::32803:::*LISTEN - tcp6 0 0 :::7080 :::*LISTEN 1057/jsvc.exec Guidance, questions, thoughts? Thank you, -- Scot Gabriel while(!(succeed=try())); pgp.mit.edu (0xcfe3d15c891fca57)
Problems Creating Templates in CloudStack 4.4
I am unable to reliably create templates from volumes. The create
template fails at various percentages complete and will fail multiple
times before the template creates successfully. I am having this problem
with multiple VMs.
The error I receive in CloudStack is Failed to create templateCreating
Template from volume 1a56fd0e-fea3-4423-9cf0-d0a45e4f2391 failed tue to
java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException: NO event for task
OpaqueRef:73321d08-95ae-c099-7591-810f20226a23.
Below is what I see in my logs. Is this some kind of bug?
Thanks,
Alicia
2014-10-17 10:51:39,694 DEBUG [o.a.c.h.x.XenServerResourceNewBase]
(DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Task: ref:OpaqueRef:73321d07-95ae-c099-
7591-810f30336a23, UUID:e5afcfba-89a7-d01f-26b2-3cf6c28c8809 progress:
0.15
2014-10-17 10:51:39,703 WARN [o.a.c.h.x.XenServerResourceNewBase]
(DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) No event for task OpaqueRef:73321d07-
95ae-c099-7591-810f30336a23
2014-10-17 10:51:39,738 DEBUG [c.c.h.x.r.CitrixResourceBase]
(DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Host 10.0.0.26 OpaqueRef:4b47b87a-e111-
55b2-be4c-316a0e5ece9e: Removing SR
2014-10-17 10:51:39,745 DEBUG [c.c.h.x.r.CitrixResourceBase]
(DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Host 10.0.0.26 OpaqueRef:4b47b87a-e111-
55b2-be4c-316a0e5ece9e: Catch XenAPIException: This operation cannot be
performed because this VDI is in use by some other operation
2014-10-17 10:51:39,752 DEBUG [c.c.h.x.r.CitrixResourceBase]
(DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Host 10.0.0.26 OpaqueRef:4b47b87a-e111-
55b2-be4c-316a0e5ece9e: Catch XenAPIException: This operation cannot be
performed because this VDI is in use by some other operation
2014-10-17 10:51:39,752 WARN [c.c.h.x.r.CitrixResourceBase]
(DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Host 10.0.0.26 OpaqueRef:4b47b87a-e111-
55b2-be4c-316a0e5ece9e: Unable to remove SR
2014-10-17 10:51:40,787 ERROR [c.c.h.x.r.XenServerStorageProcessor]
(DirectAgent-290:ctx-0b0e908f) Creating template from volume 1a56fd0e-
fea3-4423-9cf0-d0a45e4f2391 failed due to
java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException: No event for task
OpaqueRef:73321d07-95ae-c099-7591-810f30336a23
java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException: No event for task
OpaqueRef:73321d07-95ae-c099-7591-810f30336a23
at
org.apache.cloudstack.hypervisor.xenserver.XenServerResourceNewBase.wait
ForTask(XenServerResourceNewBase.java:124)
at
com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.Xenserver625StorageProcessor.createTem
plateFromVolume(Xenserver625StorageProcessor.java:556)
at
com.cloud.storage.resource.StorageSubsystemCommandHandlerBase.execute(St
orageSubsystemCommandHandlerBase.java:90)
at
com.cloud.storage.resource.StorageSubsystemCommandHandlerBase.handleStor
ageCommands(StorageSubsystemCommandHandlerBase.java:52)
at
com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.CitrixResourceBase.executeRequest(Citr
ixResourceBase.java:546)
at
com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.XenServer56Resource.executeRequest(Xen
Server56Resource.java:61)
at
com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.XenServer610Resource.executeRequest(Xe
nServer610Resource.java:102)
at
com.cloud.hypervisor.xen.resource.XenServer620SP1Resource.executeRequest
(XenServer620SP1Resource.java:65)
at
com.cloud.agent.manager.DirectAgentAttache$Task.runInContext(DirectAgent
Attache.java:216)
at
org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(Manag
edContextRunnable.java:49)
at
org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call(
DefaultManagedContext.java:56)
at
org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWit
hContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
at
org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWith
Context(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
at
org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(Managed
ContextRunnable.java:46)
at
java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471)
at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
at
java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.acc
ess$201(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:178)
at
java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run
(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:292)
at
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.jav
a:1145)
at
java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.ja
va:615)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)
2014-10-17 10:51:40,792 DEBUG [c.c.a.m.DirectAgentAttache] (DirectAgent-
290:ctx-0b0e908f) Seq 24914-6837871609232003023: Response Received:
2014-10-17 10:51:40,792 DEBUG [c.c.a.t.Request] (DirectAgent-290:ctx-
0b0e908f) Seq 24914-6837871609232003023: Processing: { Ans: , MgmtId:
178252417901011, via: 24914, Ver: v1, Flags: 10,
[{"org.apache.cloudstack.storage.command.CopyCmdAnswer":
{"result":false,"details":"Creating template from volume 1a56fd0e-fea3-
4
Re: Primary Storage Allocated issue
Hi Denis, Try to reduce expunge interval values to 120 and expunge delay. When you delete VMs or disk, etc., CloudStack will keep its details in the database and disks on the primary storage for 24 hours. You can shorten this period to expunge 120 seconds. expunge.interval = 120 expunge.delay=120 Restart cloudstack once these changes completed. Thank You. Gopalakrishnan.S Cloud Consultant - Fogpanel. - Original Message - From: "Denis Finko" To: ; Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 5:21 PM Subject: Re: Primary Storage Allocated issue GopalaKrishnan, I am appreciate you for quick reply! But unfortunately "expunge.interval" is not helpful. I have several time updated it recently and it wasn't removed old VMs from VMware. Currently I have: expunge.interval = 86400 There is no need to push manually to remove expunged volumes. Yes, I am agree with you that it's supposed to be. But unfortunately I still have a lot of volumes in 'Expunged' state and don't know how correctly remove them from CloudStack side. It looks like a bug in CloudStack. On 10/17/2014 01:35 PM, GopalaKrishnan wrote: Hi Denis, I think, it should be calculated disk size also from 'Expunged' volumes. Try to update "expunge.interval" in cloudstack global settings. There is no need to push manually to remove expunged volumes. Thank You. Gopalakrishnan.S Cloud Consultant. - Original Message - From: "Denis Finko" To: ; Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:47 PM Subject: Primary Storage Allocated issue Hello CloudStack community, Could you please take a look to following issue. The similar was described it that topic http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.cloudstack.user/13848 but looks like wasn't resolved. In my environment I have: CloudStack v. 4.2.1 VMware v. 5.1 Recently I have found that CloudStack UI provide following information for SATA storage: Disk Total 5.00 TB Disk Allocated7.26 TB I have looked to VMware side and found absolutely different data: Capacity:5.00 TB Provisioned Space:4.27 TB As you can see CloudStack show allocated disk space on 3 TB more. My Global Settings that could be helpful for investigation: storage.overprovisioning.factor = 4 storage.cleanup.enabled = true storage.cleanup.interval = 86400 storage.stats.interval = 6 capacity.check.period = 6 expunge.delay=60 expunge.interval=86400 expunge.workers=10 I have looked to CloudStack database and found that some Volumes state in 'Destroy' but also I have found a lot of in 'Expunged': mysql> select v.state, sum(v.size) from volumes v, vm_instance vm, vm_root_disk_tags d where v.instance_id=vm.id and d.vm_id=vm.id and d.root_disk_tag like 'sata' group by v.state; +---+---+ | state | sum(v.size) | +---+---+ | Destroy | 664646189056 | | Expunged | 526388544 | | Expunging |2147483648 | | Ready | 3833258311680 | +---+---+ 4 rows in set (0.00 sec) And a lot of VMs that have state=Expunged (in volume table) still present in VMware and on storage. For example all these VMs still present in VMware: mysql> select vm.name,vm.instance_name,vm.state AS VM_state,v.id,v.size,v.state AS VOLUME_state,v.removed,d.root_disk_tag from volumes v, vm_instance vm, vm_root_disk_tags d where v.instance_id=vm.id and d.vm_id=vm.id and v.state like 'Expunged' and d.root_disk_tag like 'sata'; (Names have been changed) +--+---+---+---+--+--+-+---+ | name | instance_name |VM_state |id | size | VOLUME_state | removed | root_disk_tag | +--+---+---+---+--+--+-+---+ | name1| i-43-2147-VM | Expunging | 2195 | 53687091200 | Expunged | 2014-10-16 08:12:04 | sata | | name2| i-17-2123-VM | Expunging | 2173 | 10737418240 | Expunged | 2014-10-15 19:14:30 | sata | | name3| i-43-2052-VM | Expunging | 2098 | 10737418240 | Expunged | 2014-10-07 11:57:49 | sata | | name4| i-191-1954-VM | Expunging | 2000 | 42949672960 | Expunged | 2014-10-01 15:15:04 | sata | | name5| i-132-1966-VM | Expunging | 2012 | 21474836480 | Expunged | 2014-09-29 20:33:12 | sata | | name6| i-132-1967-VM | Expunging | 2013 | 21474836480 | Expunged | 2014-09-29 20:33:12 | sata | | name7| i-132-1962-VM | Expunging | 2008 | 10737418240 | Expunged | 2014-09-29 20:33:11 | sata | | name8| i-132-1964-VM | Expunging | 2010 | 10737418240 | Expunged | 2014-09-29 20:33:11 | sata | Not all VMs with 'Expunged' state still present in VMware but a lot of from them still weren't removed! mysql> select id,uuid,nam
Re: Primary Storage Allocated issue
GopalaKrishnan, I am appreciate you for quick reply! But unfortunately "expunge.interval" is not helpful. I have several time updated it recently and it wasn't removed old VMs from VMware. Currently I have: expunge.interval = 86400 > There is no need to push manually to remove expunged volumes. Yes, I am agree with you that it's supposed to be. But unfortunately I still have a lot of volumes in 'Expunged' state and don't know how correctly remove them from CloudStack side. It looks like a bug in CloudStack. On 10/17/2014 01:35 PM, GopalaKrishnan wrote: > Hi Denis, > > I think, it should be calculated disk size also from 'Expunged' volumes. Try > to update "expunge.interval" in cloudstack global settings. > > There is no need to push manually to remove expunged volumes. > > Thank You. > Gopalakrishnan.S > Cloud Consultant. > - Original Message - From: "Denis Finko" > To: ; > Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:47 PM > Subject: Primary Storage Allocated issue > > >> Hello CloudStack community, >> >> Could you please take a look to following issue. The similar was described >> it that topic >> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.cloudstack.user/13848 but looks >> like wasn't resolved. >> >> In my environment I have: >> CloudStack v. 4.2.1 >> VMware v. 5.1 >> >> Recently I have found that CloudStack UI provide following information for >> SATA storage: >> Disk Total 5.00 TB >> Disk Allocated7.26 TB >> >> I have looked to VMware side and found absolutely different data: >> Capacity:5.00 TB >> Provisioned Space:4.27 TB >> >> As you can see CloudStack show allocated disk space on 3 TB more. >> >> My Global Settings that could be helpful for investigation: >> storage.overprovisioning.factor = 4 >> storage.cleanup.enabled = true >> storage.cleanup.interval = 86400 >> storage.stats.interval = 6 >> capacity.check.period = 6 >> expunge.delay=60 >> expunge.interval=86400 >> expunge.workers=10 >> >> I have looked to CloudStack database and found that some Volumes state in >> 'Destroy' but also I have found a lot of in 'Expunged': >> mysql> select v.state, sum(v.size) from volumes v, vm_instance vm, >> vm_root_disk_tags d where v.instance_id=vm.id and d.vm_id=vm.id and >> d.root_disk_tag like 'sata' group by v.state; >> +---+---+ >> | state | sum(v.size) | >> +---+---+ >> | Destroy | 664646189056 | >> | Expunged | 526388544 | >> | Expunging |2147483648 | >> | Ready | 3833258311680 | >> +---+---+ >> 4 rows in set (0.00 sec) >> >> And a lot of VMs that have state=Expunged (in volume table) still present in >> VMware and on storage. For example all these VMs still present in VMware: >> >> mysql> select vm.name,vm.instance_name,vm.state AS >> VM_state,v.id,v.size,v.state AS VOLUME_state,v.removed,d.root_disk_tag from >> volumes v, vm_instance vm, vm_root_disk_tags d where v.instance_id=vm.id and >> d.vm_id=vm.id and v.state like 'Expunged' and d.root_disk_tag like 'sata'; >> (Names have been >> changed) >> +--+---+---+---+--+--+-+---+ >> | name | instance_name |VM_state |id |size | >> VOLUME_state | removed | root_disk_tag | >> +--+---+---+---+--+--+-+---+ >> | name1| i-43-2147-VM | Expunging | 2195 | 53687091200 | Expunged >> | 2014-10-16 08:12:04 | sata | >> | name2| i-17-2123-VM | Expunging | 2173 | 10737418240 | Expunged >> | 2014-10-15 19:14:30 | sata | >> | name3| i-43-2052-VM | Expunging | 2098 | 10737418240 | Expunged >> | 2014-10-07 11:57:49 | sata | >> | name4| i-191-1954-VM | Expunging | 2000 | 42949672960 | Expunged >> | 2014-10-01 15:15:04 | sata | >> | name5| i-132-1966-VM | Expunging | 2012 | 21474836480 | Expunged >> | 2014-09-29 20:33:12 | sata | >> | name6| i-132-1967-VM | Expunging | 2013 | 21474836480 | Expunged >> | 2014-09-29 20:33:12 | sata | >> | name7| i-132-1962-VM | Expunging | 2008 | 10737418240 | Expunged >> | 2014-09-29 20:33:11 | sata | >> | name8| i-132-1964-VM | Expunging | 2010 | 10737418240 | Expunged >> | 2014-09-29 20:33:11 | sata | >> >> Not all VMs with 'Expunged' state still present in VMware but a lot of from >> them still weren't removed! >> >> mysql> select >> id,uuid,name,status,capacity_bytes,capacity_iops,tag,disk_used_capacity,disk_reserved_capacity >> from storage_pool_view; >> ++--+---+-++---+--+++ >> | id | uu
Re: Primary Storage Allocated issue
GopalaKrishnan, I am appreciate you for quick reply! But unfortunately "expunge.interval" is not helpful. I have several time updated it recently and it wasn't removed old VMs from VMware. Currently I have: expunge.interval = 86400 > There is no need to push manually to remove expunged volumes. Yes, I am agree with you that it's supposed to be. But unfortunately I still have a lot of volumes in 'Expunged' state and don't know how correctly remove them from CloudStack side. It looks like a bug in CloudStack. On 10/17/2014 01:35 PM, GopalaKrishnan wrote: > Hi Denis, > > I think, it should be calculated disk size also from 'Expunged' volumes. Try > to update "expunge.interval" in cloudstack global settings. > > There is no need to push manually to remove expunged volumes. > > Thank You. > Gopalakrishnan.S > Cloud Consultant. > - Original Message - From: "Denis Finko" > To: ; > Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:47 PM > Subject: Primary Storage Allocated issue > > >> Hello CloudStack community, >> >> Could you please take a look to following issue. The similar was described >> it that topic >> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.cloudstack.user/13848 but looks >> like wasn't resolved. >> >> In my environment I have: >> CloudStack v. 4.2.1 >> VMware v. 5.1 >> >> Recently I have found that CloudStack UI provide following information for >> SATA storage: >> Disk Total 5.00 TB >> Disk Allocated7.26 TB >> >> I have looked to VMware side and found absolutely different data: >> Capacity:5.00 TB >> Provisioned Space:4.27 TB >> >> As you can see CloudStack show allocated disk space on 3 TB more. >> >> My Global Settings that could be helpful for investigation: >> storage.overprovisioning.factor = 4 >> storage.cleanup.enabled = true >> storage.cleanup.interval = 86400 >> storage.stats.interval = 6 >> capacity.check.period = 6 >> expunge.delay=60 >> expunge.interval=86400 >> expunge.workers=10 >> >> I have looked to CloudStack database and found that some Volumes state in >> 'Destroy' but also I have found a lot of in 'Expunged': >> mysql> select v.state, sum(v.size) from volumes v, vm_instance vm, >> vm_root_disk_tags d where v.instance_id=vm.id and d.vm_id=vm.id and >> d.root_disk_tag like 'sata' group by v.state; >> +---+---+ >> | state | sum(v.size) | >> +---+---+ >> | Destroy | 664646189056 | >> | Expunged | 526388544 | >> | Expunging |2147483648 | >> | Ready | 3833258311680 | >> +---+---+ >> 4 rows in set (0.00 sec) >> >> And a lot of VMs that have state=Expunged (in volume table) still present in >> VMware and on storage. For example all these VMs still present in VMware: >> >> mysql> select vm.name,vm.instance_name,vm.state AS >> VM_state,v.id,v.size,v.state AS VOLUME_state,v.removed,d.root_disk_tag from >> volumes v, vm_instance vm, vm_root_disk_tags d where v.instance_id=vm.id and >> d.vm_id=vm.id and v.state like 'Expunged' and d.root_disk_tag like 'sata'; >> (Names have been >> changed) >> +--+---+---+---+--+--+-+---+ >> | name | instance_name |VM_state |id |size | >> VOLUME_state | removed | root_disk_tag | >> +--+---+---+---+--+--+-+---+ >> | name1| i-43-2147-VM | Expunging | 2195 | 53687091200 | Expunged >> | 2014-10-16 08:12:04 | sata | >> | name2| i-17-2123-VM | Expunging | 2173 | 10737418240 | Expunged >> | 2014-10-15 19:14:30 | sata | >> | name3| i-43-2052-VM | Expunging | 2098 | 10737418240 | Expunged >> | 2014-10-07 11:57:49 | sata | >> | name4| i-191-1954-VM | Expunging | 2000 | 42949672960 | Expunged >> | 2014-10-01 15:15:04 | sata | >> | name5| i-132-1966-VM | Expunging | 2012 | 21474836480 | Expunged >> | 2014-09-29 20:33:12 | sata | >> | name6| i-132-1967-VM | Expunging | 2013 | 21474836480 | Expunged >> | 2014-09-29 20:33:12 | sata | >> | name7| i-132-1962-VM | Expunging | 2008 | 10737418240 | Expunged >> | 2014-09-29 20:33:11 | sata | >> | name8| i-132-1964-VM | Expunging | 2010 | 10737418240 | Expunged >> | 2014-09-29 20:33:11 | sata | >> >> Not all VMs with 'Expunged' state still present in VMware but a lot of from >> them still weren't removed! >> >> mysql> select >> id,uuid,name,status,capacity_bytes,capacity_iops,tag,disk_used_capacity,disk_reserved_capacity >> from storage_pool_view; >> ++--+---+-++---+--+++ >> | id | u
Re: Fwd: Guest VM with Multiple Networks on single VR (Virtual Router)
Hi Kirk, Thanks a lot for your support I could able to make it. it is working as expected Thanks Again. AR On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Kirk Kosinski wrote: > If you didn't check anything at all when creating the Network Offering > it is probably not configured correctly. Look at the default shared > Network Offering and create a new offering based on that but without the > things you specifically know you don't want, such as DHCP, DNS, etc.. > If you don't know what the setting is then just set it the same as the > default offering. I believe the error you pasted is occurring because > the offering has Specify IP ranges = no. > > Best regards, > Kirk > > On 10/16/2014 10:27 PM, Abdul Rasool wrote: > > My Network config details are below. > > > > 192.168.200.0/24cloudbr3 --> Management NW > > 192.168.100.0/24cloudbr0 --> Guest+Public N/W > > 192.168.201.0/24cloudbr4 --> Storage N/W > > NO IP mention on NIC cloudbr5 --> Guest Additional Network. > > > > I am trying to use guest additional network offering without using any > ACS > > offering like VR, DNS, DHCP, Firewall etc. I have created a new network > > offering called Ex-LAN-NO-Offering while creating this I have not > selected > > any of the default offering from the list. at the end I have mention this > > particular interface tags.thatz all. > > > > In this physical NIC (cloudbr5) doesn’t have any existing network when I > > try configuring new network using Ex-LAN-NO-Offering I am getting this > > error *Network offering with specified id doesn't support adding multiple > > ip ranges*. > > > > Please help me am I doing any thing wrong here . > > > > Thanks > > AR > > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:58 AM, Kirk Kosinski > > wrote: > > > >> Please provide the complete details of the Network Offering you are > >> trying to use. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Kirk > >> > >> On 10/16/2014 05:36 AM, Abdul Rasool wrote: > >>> Hi Kirk, > >>> > >>> Thanks for your suggestion, > >>> > >>> I have tried doing the same mentioning some IPs with service offering > >> which > >>> has not selected any of the cloudstack service in the list, & account > >>> specified. I get this below error Network offering with specified id > >>> doesn't support adding multiple ip ranges > >>> > >>> > >>> This I have tried on Admin UI --> Infrastructure --> Zone--> POD--> > >>> physical NIC --> Guest---> Network --> add guest Network. > >>> > >>> > >>> Please guide me why I am not able to add this new network on ACS. > >>> > >>> Regards, > >>> AR > >>> > >>> > >>> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Kirk Kosinski > > >>> wrote: > >>> > Hi, Abdul. In your previous message you wrote: > > > I want to add additional > > physical NIC to VM without mention IPs and service offering from > > cloudstack > > To me this sounds like you want to make changes directly to a VM at > the > hypervisor level, so I was trying to explain that this won't work as > CloudStack can and will undo any such changes. You will need to add > every network to CloudStack that you want CloudStack-managed VMs to > use. > As I explained earlier you may be required to input the IP addresses > in > CloudStack, but that range will not be used if the network offering > has > DHCP disabled; thus you can configure the NIC in the VM OS with any > static IP address you want. > > Best regards, > Kirk > > On 10/14/2014 05:04 AM, Abdul Rasool wrote: > > Hi Kirk, > > > > I think we both are not on the same page, could you please go through > >> my > > below emails and let me know is my question is clear to you. if so > >> please > > help to configure this scenario. > > > > Thanks in advance. > > AR > > > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Kirk Kosinski < > >> kirkkosin...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi, all VM configuration needs to be done in CloudStack, otherwise > it > >> will be undone by CloudStack under various common circumstance > >> (reboot, > >> stop/start, etc.). > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Kirk > >> > >> On 10/13/2014 04:03 AM, Abdul Rasool wrote: > >>> Hi Kirk > >>> > >>> Thanks for your reply, > >>> > >>> adding to some more points on the same case I want to add > additional > >>> physical NIC to VM without mention IPs and service offering from > >> cloudstack > >>> is that possible ?. in my case I have 1 VM which has public NIC and > need > >>> one more additional physical NIC for internal use. on the WAN side > every > >>> thing is working as expected in the same VM I would need to add one > more > >>> physical NIC which I need to manually configure IPs in different > >> range > >>> apart from the default CIDR.(Eg - connecting to different network > >> over > >>> MPLS) meaning one guest VM will have two network one towards to > >> publi
Re: Primary Storage Allocated issue
Hi Denis, I think, it should be calculated disk size also from 'Expunged' volumes. Try to update "expunge.interval" in cloudstack global settings. There is no need to push manually to remove expunged volumes. Thank You. Gopalakrishnan.S Cloud Consultant. - Original Message - From: "Denis Finko" To: ; Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 1:47 PM Subject: Primary Storage Allocated issue Hello CloudStack community, Could you please take a look to following issue. The similar was described it that topic http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.cloudstack.user/13848 but looks like wasn't resolved. In my environment I have: CloudStack v. 4.2.1 VMware v. 5.1 Recently I have found that CloudStack UI provide following information for SATA storage: Disk Total 5.00 TB Disk Allocated7.26 TB I have looked to VMware side and found absolutely different data: Capacity:5.00 TB Provisioned Space:4.27 TB As you can see CloudStack show allocated disk space on 3 TB more. My Global Settings that could be helpful for investigation: storage.overprovisioning.factor = 4 storage.cleanup.enabled = true storage.cleanup.interval = 86400 storage.stats.interval = 6 capacity.check.period = 6 expunge.delay=60 expunge.interval=86400 expunge.workers=10 I have looked to CloudStack database and found that some Volumes state in 'Destroy' but also I have found a lot of in 'Expunged': mysql> select v.state, sum(v.size) from volumes v, vm_instance vm, vm_root_disk_tags d where v.instance_id=vm.id and d.vm_id=vm.id and d.root_disk_tag like 'sata' group by v.state; +---+---+ | state | sum(v.size) | +---+---+ | Destroy | 664646189056 | | Expunged | 526388544 | | Expunging |2147483648 | | Ready | 3833258311680 | +---+---+ 4 rows in set (0.00 sec) And a lot of VMs that have state=Expunged (in volume table) still present in VMware and on storage. For example all these VMs still present in VMware: mysql> select vm.name,vm.instance_name,vm.state AS VM_state,v.id,v.size,v.state AS VOLUME_state,v.removed,d.root_disk_tag from volumes v, vm_instance vm, vm_root_disk_tags d where v.instance_id=vm.id and d.vm_id=vm.id and v.state like 'Expunged' and d.root_disk_tag like 'sata'; (Names have been changed) +--+---+---+---+--+--+-+---+ | name | instance_name |VM_state |id |size | VOLUME_state | removed | root_disk_tag | +--+---+---+---+--+--+-+---+ | name1| i-43-2147-VM | Expunging | 2195 | 53687091200 | Expunged | 2014-10-16 08:12:04 | sata | | name2| i-17-2123-VM | Expunging | 2173 | 10737418240 | Expunged | 2014-10-15 19:14:30 | sata | | name3| i-43-2052-VM | Expunging | 2098 | 10737418240 | Expunged | 2014-10-07 11:57:49 | sata | | name4| i-191-1954-VM | Expunging | 2000 | 42949672960 | Expunged | 2014-10-01 15:15:04 | sata | | name5| i-132-1966-VM | Expunging | 2012 | 21474836480 | Expunged | 2014-09-29 20:33:12 | sata | | name6| i-132-1967-VM | Expunging | 2013 | 21474836480 | Expunged | 2014-09-29 20:33:12 | sata | | name7| i-132-1962-VM | Expunging | 2008 | 10737418240 | Expunged | 2014-09-29 20:33:11 | sata | | name8| i-132-1964-VM | Expunging | 2010 | 10737418240 | Expunged | 2014-09-29 20:33:11 | sata | Not all VMs with 'Expunged' state still present in VMware but a lot of from them still weren't removed! mysql> select id,uuid,name,status,capacity_bytes,capacity_iops,tag,disk_used_capacity,disk_reserved_capacity from storage_pool_view; ++--+---+-++---+--+++ | id | uuid | name | status | capacity_bytes | capacity_iops | tag | disk_used_capacity | disk_reserved_capacity | ++--+---+-++---+--+++ | 2 | 096b3b6e-481d-33b4-9b34-7178612a2535 | SATA | Up | 5497289703424 | NULL | sata | 7913594810761 | 0 | ++--+---+-++---+--+++ 5 rows in set (0.02 sec) Also I have found that Expunged volumes have 'chain_info' field: mysql> select name,removed,state,chain_info from volumes where id=2112 \G
Problem in taking snapshot of Volume & VM
Hi I have installed CloudStack and configure 2 additional hosts. I am using KVM Hypervisor. I have configured NFS server also and Primary & Secondary Storage are on it. I have also launched an instance successfully. I tried to take snapshot of Storage Root disk of that instance. It showed Snapshot taken Successfully. However in View Snapshots --> It shows Error under status of that Snapshot. Any clue ? Also I am not able to take Snapshot of VM. Regards Neelesh Gurjar
Re: firewall problems and proxy problems
I cleared the database and re-did the installation and all seems to be working now. Thanks for the help. It seems that something must have been off during the initial install.
Re: Fwd: Guest VM with Multiple Networks on single VR (Virtual Router)
If you didn't check anything at all when creating the Network Offering it is probably not configured correctly. Look at the default shared Network Offering and create a new offering based on that but without the things you specifically know you don't want, such as DHCP, DNS, etc.. If you don't know what the setting is then just set it the same as the default offering. I believe the error you pasted is occurring because the offering has Specify IP ranges = no. Best regards, Kirk On 10/16/2014 10:27 PM, Abdul Rasool wrote: > My Network config details are below. > > 192.168.200.0/24cloudbr3 --> Management NW > 192.168.100.0/24cloudbr0 --> Guest+Public N/W > 192.168.201.0/24cloudbr4 --> Storage N/W > NO IP mention on NIC cloudbr5 --> Guest Additional Network. > > I am trying to use guest additional network offering without using any ACS > offering like VR, DNS, DHCP, Firewall etc. I have created a new network > offering called Ex-LAN-NO-Offering while creating this I have not selected > any of the default offering from the list. at the end I have mention this > particular interface tags.thatz all. > > In this physical NIC (cloudbr5) doesn’t have any existing network when I > try configuring new network using Ex-LAN-NO-Offering I am getting this > error *Network offering with specified id doesn't support adding multiple > ip ranges*. > > Please help me am I doing any thing wrong here . > > Thanks > AR > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 5:58 AM, Kirk Kosinski > wrote: > >> Please provide the complete details of the Network Offering you are >> trying to use. >> >> Best regards, >> Kirk >> >> On 10/16/2014 05:36 AM, Abdul Rasool wrote: >>> Hi Kirk, >>> >>> Thanks for your suggestion, >>> >>> I have tried doing the same mentioning some IPs with service offering >> which >>> has not selected any of the cloudstack service in the list, & account >>> specified. I get this below error Network offering with specified id >>> doesn't support adding multiple ip ranges >>> >>> >>> This I have tried on Admin UI --> Infrastructure --> Zone--> POD--> >>> physical NIC --> Guest---> Network --> add guest Network. >>> >>> >>> Please guide me why I am not able to add this new network on ACS. >>> >>> Regards, >>> AR >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Kirk Kosinski >>> wrote: >>> Hi, Abdul. In your previous message you wrote: > I want to add additional > physical NIC to VM without mention IPs and service offering from > cloudstack To me this sounds like you want to make changes directly to a VM at the hypervisor level, so I was trying to explain that this won't work as CloudStack can and will undo any such changes. You will need to add every network to CloudStack that you want CloudStack-managed VMs to use. As I explained earlier you may be required to input the IP addresses in CloudStack, but that range will not be used if the network offering has DHCP disabled; thus you can configure the NIC in the VM OS with any static IP address you want. Best regards, Kirk On 10/14/2014 05:04 AM, Abdul Rasool wrote: > Hi Kirk, > > I think we both are not on the same page, could you please go through >> my > below emails and let me know is my question is clear to you. if so >> please > help to configure this scenario. > > Thanks in advance. > AR > > On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 12:56 AM, Kirk Kosinski < >> kirkkosin...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, all VM configuration needs to be done in CloudStack, otherwise it >> will be undone by CloudStack under various common circumstance >> (reboot, >> stop/start, etc.). >> >> Best regards, >> Kirk >> >> On 10/13/2014 04:03 AM, Abdul Rasool wrote: >>> Hi Kirk >>> >>> Thanks for your reply, >>> >>> adding to some more points on the same case I want to add additional >>> physical NIC to VM without mention IPs and service offering from >> cloudstack >>> is that possible ?. in my case I have 1 VM which has public NIC and need >>> one more additional physical NIC for internal use. on the WAN side every >>> thing is working as expected in the same VM I would need to add one more >>> physical NIC which I need to manually configure IPs in different >> range >>> apart from the default CIDR.(Eg - connecting to different network >> over >>> MPLS) meaning one guest VM will have two network one towards to >> public >> with >>> default CIDR and other network towards to MPLS on different IP range, is >>> that possible if so could you please assist me on this. >>> >>> Thanks >>> AR >>> >>> On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Kirk Kosinski < >> kirkkosin...@gmail.com > >>> wrote: >>> Hi, as I said before you may still be required to input an IP range when creating the network, but it
Re: firewall problems and proxy problems
ok, then I'd re-init the db and try again, Keeping Pauls remark in mind. I usually mess up my ip space and find myself stuck in a mess. Paul didn't you post a sample layout somewhere? On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 10:38 AM, Marc Leeman wrote: > On 16 October 2014 17:53, Daan Hoogland wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Marc Leeman > > wrote: > > > > > Is there some inconsistency in the database? > > > > > This might well be. To check this look at mshost and mshost_peer. > > > > Are you upgrading? Is this a test setup? > > > > > > > It is my first setup :-) > > mysql> select * from mshost_peer; > > ++--+-+---++-+ > | id | owner_mshost | peer_mshost | peer_runid| peer_state | > last_update | > > ++--+-+---++-+ > | 1 |1 | 1 | 1413300325989 | Up | 2014-10-14 > 15:25:55 | > | 2 |2 | 2 | 1413301475290 | Up | 2014-10-14 > 15:44:48 | > | 16 |3 | 3 | 1413473252587 | Up | 2014-10-16 > 15:27:45 | > > ++--+-+---++-+ > 3 rows in set (0.00 sec) > > mysql> select * from mshost; > > ++-+---+--+---+-++--+-+-+-+ > | id | msid| runid | name | state | version | > service_ip | service_port | last_update | removed | alert_count | > > ++-+---+--+---+-++--+-+-+-+ > | 1 | 172136268721636 | 1413300325989 | zee | Up| 4.3.1 | > 172.16.8.7 | 9090 | 2014-10-14 15:41:40 | NULL| 0 | > | 2 | 72986426470976 | 1413301475290 | zee | Up| 4.3.1 | > 172.16.8.7 | 9090 | 2014-10-14 16:18:24 | NULL| 0 | > | 3 | 279278805451256 | 1413473252587 | zee | Up| 4.3.1 | > 172.16.8.7 | 9090 | 2014-10-17 08:37:41 | NULL| 0 | > > ++-+---+--+---+-++--+-+-+-+ > 3 rows in set (0.00 sec) > -- Daan
Re: firewall problems and proxy problems
On 16 October 2014 17:53, Daan Hoogland wrote: > On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Marc Leeman > wrote: > > > Is there some inconsistency in the database? > > > This might well be. To check this look at mshost and mshost_peer. > > Are you upgrading? Is this a test setup? > > > It is my first setup :-) mysql> select * from mshost_peer; ++--+-+---++-+ | id | owner_mshost | peer_mshost | peer_runid| peer_state | last_update | ++--+-+---++-+ | 1 |1 | 1 | 1413300325989 | Up | 2014-10-14 15:25:55 | | 2 |2 | 2 | 1413301475290 | Up | 2014-10-14 15:44:48 | | 16 |3 | 3 | 1413473252587 | Up | 2014-10-16 15:27:45 | ++--+-+---++-+ 3 rows in set (0.00 sec) mysql> select * from mshost; ++-+---+--+---+-++--+-+-+-+ | id | msid| runid | name | state | version | service_ip | service_port | last_update | removed | alert_count | ++-+---+--+---+-++--+-+-+-+ | 1 | 172136268721636 | 1413300325989 | zee | Up| 4.3.1 | 172.16.8.7 | 9090 | 2014-10-14 15:41:40 | NULL| 0 | | 2 | 72986426470976 | 1413301475290 | zee | Up| 4.3.1 | 172.16.8.7 | 9090 | 2014-10-14 16:18:24 | NULL| 0 | | 3 | 279278805451256 | 1413473252587 | zee | Up| 4.3.1 | 172.16.8.7 | 9090 | 2014-10-17 08:37:41 | NULL| 0 | ++-+---+--+---+-++--+-+-+-+ 3 rows in set (0.00 sec)
Primary Storage Allocated issue
Hello CloudStack community,
Could you please take a look to following issue. The similar was described it
that topic http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.apache.cloudstack.user/13848
but looks like wasn't resolved.
In my environment I have:
CloudStack v. 4.2.1
VMware v. 5.1
Recently I have found that CloudStack UI provide following information for SATA
storage:
Disk Total 5.00 TB
Disk Allocated7.26 TB
I have looked to VMware side and found absolutely different data:
Capacity:5.00 TB
Provisioned Space:4.27 TB
As you can see CloudStack show allocated disk space on 3 TB more.
My Global Settings that could be helpful for investigation:
storage.overprovisioning.factor = 4
storage.cleanup.enabled = true
storage.cleanup.interval = 86400
storage.stats.interval = 6
capacity.check.period = 6
expunge.delay=60
expunge.interval=86400
expunge.workers=10
I have looked to CloudStack database and found that some Volumes state in
'Destroy' but also I have found a lot of in 'Expunged':
mysql> select v.state, sum(v.size) from volumes v, vm_instance vm,
vm_root_disk_tags d where v.instance_id=vm.id and d.vm_id=vm.id and
d.root_disk_tag like 'sata' group by v.state;
+---+---+
| state | sum(v.size) |
+---+---+
| Destroy | 664646189056 |
| Expunged | 526388544 |
| Expunging |2147483648 |
| Ready | 3833258311680 |
+---+---+
4 rows in set (0.00 sec)
And a lot of VMs that have state=Expunged (in volume table) still present in
VMware and on storage. For example all these VMs still present in VMware:
mysql> select vm.name,vm.instance_name,vm.state AS VM_state,v.id,v.size,v.state
AS VOLUME_state,v.removed,d.root_disk_tag from volumes v, vm_instance vm,
vm_root_disk_tags d where v.instance_id=vm.id and d.vm_id=vm.id and v.state
like 'Expunged' and d.root_disk_tag like 'sata'; (Names have been changed)
+--+---+---+---+--+--+-+---+
| name | instance_name |VM_state |id |size
| VOLUME_state | removed | root_disk_tag |
+--+---+---+---+--+--+-+---+
| name1| i-43-2147-VM | Expunging | 2195 | 53687091200 | Expunged
| 2014-10-16 08:12:04 | sata |
| name2| i-17-2123-VM | Expunging | 2173 | 10737418240 | Expunged
| 2014-10-15 19:14:30 | sata |
| name3| i-43-2052-VM | Expunging | 2098 | 10737418240 | Expunged
| 2014-10-07 11:57:49 | sata |
| name4| i-191-1954-VM | Expunging | 2000 | 42949672960 | Expunged
| 2014-10-01 15:15:04 | sata |
| name5| i-132-1966-VM | Expunging | 2012 | 21474836480 | Expunged
| 2014-09-29 20:33:12 | sata |
| name6| i-132-1967-VM | Expunging | 2013 | 21474836480 | Expunged
| 2014-09-29 20:33:12 | sata |
| name7| i-132-1962-VM | Expunging | 2008 | 10737418240 | Expunged
| 2014-09-29 20:33:11 | sata |
| name8| i-132-1964-VM | Expunging | 2010 | 10737418240 | Expunged
| 2014-09-29 20:33:11 | sata |
Not all VMs with 'Expunged' state still present in VMware but a lot of from
them still weren't removed!
mysql> select
id,uuid,name,status,capacity_bytes,capacity_iops,tag,disk_used_capacity,disk_reserved_capacity
from storage_pool_view;
++--+---+-++---+--+++
| id | uuid
| name | status | capacity_bytes | capacity_iops | tag |
disk_used_capacity | disk_reserved_capacity |
++--+---+-++---+--+++
| 2 | 096b3b6e-481d-33b4-9b34-7178612a2535 | SATA | Up |
5497289703424 | NULL | sata | 7913594810761 |
0 |
++--+---+-++---+--+++
5 rows in set (0.02 sec)
Also I have found that Expunged volumes have 'chain_info' field:
mysql> select name,removed,state,chain_info from volumes where id=2112 \G
*** 1. row ***
name: ROOT-2066
removed: 2014-10-09 11:57:52
state: Expunged
chain_info: {"diskDeviceBusName":"scsi0:0","diskChain":["[SATA1]
i-238-2066-VM/ROOT-2066.vmdk"]}
1 row in set (0.00 sec)
BUT Destroyed VMs don't have it:
mysql> select name,removed,stat
Cloudstack 4.3.0 UI impossible login problem : browsers hang
Hello, Configuration : Cloudstack 4.3.0. with two management servers (named 1 and 2) behind a LVS with a configured charge of 100/1 for server1/server2 (direct routing) Since two days, we have a login problem on server 1. The login pages load correctly. But after typing the correct password (local or LDAP one) the browser hangs. The first occurrence, two days ago. We restart the management server and the problem went away. Today, we cannot anymore use the server 1 and we have to user the server 2. Both servers are to our knowledge identical. And no change neither have been done on the infrastructure configuration. Is anybody here has experienced a such problem or have any clue ? The server ran for many weeks without any outage like this until now. apilog.log when we have recurring events : 2014-10-17 09:05:44,446 INFO [a.c.c.a.ApiServer] (http-6443-exec-442:ctx-8a23b456) 10.26.238.65 -- GET command=listCapabilities&response=json&sessionkey=null&_=1413529544423 401 unable to verify user credentials But we have also the same INFO message on the working server. Catalina.out : 2014-10-17 09:42:22,888 DEBUG [c.c.a.ApiServlet] (http-6443-exec-467:ctx-86fe168f) ===START=== 10.26.238.65 -- POST 2014-10-17 09:42:22,891 DEBUG [c.c.u.AccountManagerImpl] (http-6443-exec-467:ctx-86fe168f) Attempting to log in user: jf in domain 1 2014-10-17 09:42:22,892 DEBUG [c.c.s.a.SHA256SaltedUserAuthenticator] (http-6443-exec-467:ctx-86fe168f) Retrieving user: jf 2014-10-17 09:42:22,900 DEBUG [c.c.u.AccountManagerImpl] (http-6443-exec-467:ctx-86fe168f) User: jf in domain 1 has successfully logged in But browser's stucked... Thank you Jean-Francois Ce message et les pièces jointes sont confidentiels et réservés à l'usage exclusif de ses destinataires. Il peut également être protégé par le secret professionnel. Si vous recevez ce message par erreur, merci d'en avertir immédiatement l'expéditeur et de le détruire. L'intégrité du message ne pouvant être assurée sur Internet, la responsabilité de Worldline ne pourra être recherchée quant au contenu de ce message. Bien que les meilleurs efforts soient faits pour maintenir cette transmission exempte de tout virus, l'expéditeur ne donne aucune garantie à cet égard et sa responsabilité ne saurait être recherchée pour tout dommage résultant d'un virus transmis. This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy it. As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, the Worldline liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although the sender endeavours to maintain a computer virus-free network, the sender does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and will not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted.
Re: Cloudstack 4.4.1 release date?
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:16 AM, Ron Wheeler wrote: > Target is in the past. > > Once a target is missed, the date should be updated. > Otherwise people think that the target was met and they are just not very > good at finding releases. > > As stated earlier: There is no longer a schedule as the work at the moment is driven by issues that come up. So you could put a guess there or remove the target date altogether. I think neither makes sense. You are free to edit the wiki. Ron > -- Daan
