Re: Domain Limits ignored
If I read that correctly - you are saying that the domain settings are applied when deploying a VM, but not when you change the compute offering to more CPU (than the domain limit) and start the VM like that? If so, than that's a bug. Which ACS release? Regards, Andrija On Wed, 17 Jun 2020 at 15:42, Vincent Hermes wrote: > Hi Guys, > > is it a normal behaviour that a Domain Admin Account can set VM Parameters > above his own Domain restrictions? For example 16 CPU's are the Domain and > Account restrictions for the Domain Admins Account and when he creates a > machine this works properly but he can change the VM Settings in the > Settings tab (user-defined offering) even above 16 CPUs. In fact none of > the Domain Restrictions apply on settings done in this tab so RAM is > completely open as well. > > Thanks in advance and best Regards > Vincent > -- Andrija Panić
Domain Limits ignored
Hi Guys, is it a normal behaviour that a Domain Admin Account can set VM Parameters above his own Domain restrictions? For example 16 CPU's are the Domain and Account restrictions for the Domain Admins Account and when he creates a machine this works properly but he can change the VM Settings in the Settings tab (user-defined offering) even above 16 CPUs. In fact none of the Domain Restrictions apply on settings done in this tab so RAM is completely open as well. Thanks in advance and best Regards Vincent
Re: [DISCUSS] 4.14.1.0 release
Hi Rohit, thanks for bringing the 4.14.1.0 topic. I'm not aware of other critical issues besides those 2, and I would be willing to lead the release, but I'm afraid of not completing the release before my vacation/absence (I'm absent starting from beginning of July), and thus not sure if it's the best idea. Best, Andrija On Wed, 17 Jun 2020, 04:50 Rohit Yadav, wrote: > All, > > We've managed to review, test, and merge two critical issues that were > found wrt the 4.14.0.0 release whose scope is limited to only KVM/CentOS7 > security group users and the new B feature (disabled by default, won't > affect users by default): > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commit/db55910f6bc032b708afa84d56c463c648ceb9b3 > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commit/b54d19b3b9a66adbb8f5681005160ca549f35e33 > > Please discuss: > > * Are there any other outstanding blocker, critical issues that we've > missed or have been discovered in 4.14.0.0 release? > * Does anybody want to lead the 4.14.1.0 release work effort? > > Thanks and regards. > > rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com > www.shapeblue.com > 3 London Bridge Street, 3rd floor, News Building, London SE1 9SGUK > @shapeblue > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] Next CloudMonkey release v6.1.0
Hi Rohit, I'll log an issue or two (I recall using filter to display only 2 properties in a specific order, but cmk decided to show them in his own order/alphabetically, at least for some APIs). Otherwise, +1 for the new release. Thanks, Andrija On Wed, 17 Jun 2020, 04:59 Rohit Yadav, wrote: > All, > > Ping - any feedback towards the next release[1]? Thanks. > > [1] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-cloudmonkey/milestone/2 > > Regards. > > > > rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com > www.shapeblue.com > 3 London Bridge Street, 3rd floor, News Building, London SE1 9SGUK > @shapeblue > > > > From: Rohit Yadav > Sent: Saturday, May 9, 2020 11:17 > To: d...@cloudstack.apache.org ; > users@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: [DISCUSS] Next CloudMonkey release v6.1.0 > > All, > > It's been over a year since the last CloudMonkey (cmk) release. While cmk > appears to stable (given no major complains) we've had a few fixes since > the last release and we must work on a release in near future (likely after > 4.14 and Primate tech preview). > > I've triaged a few issues for the next v6.1.0 milestone, kindly provide > any feedback, comments on this thread and report issues/feature requests > here https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-cloudmonkey/issues > > Thanks. > > > Regards, > > Rohit Yadav > > Software Architect, ShapeBlue > > https://www.shapeblue.com >
