Re: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements
Hi Nathan, You are right, the inclusion of templates as part of the cloudstack management package was done bearing in mind that we may have users with restricted internet connection. With respect to the second point you make, while creating separate packages for different hypervisor templates would solve the issue of the size of the package, we may still end up facing the same issue of missing systemVM templates in scenarios where we start off with a zone with say, KVM hosts and in due course of time, decide to add XenServer/ VMWare hosts and the admin doesn't install the hypervisor specific packages. Keeping that in mind, we thought that the all-in-one approach covers more ground. Thanks, Pearl From: Nathan McGarvey Sent: Friday, September 3, 2021 11:53 AM To: users@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements +1 This is also helpful for restricted-from-internet installations. (E.g. places with on-site installs and strong firewall/proxy/air-gap rules.) Which is a feature that is increasingly hard to come by for cloud-based underpinnings, but increasingly of interest for many organizations who like to have control of where their data resides. (Banks, medical institutions, governments, etc.) Should it be in the same packaging, or be a separate package entirely? That way the current packaging could still remain as-is but have the option of obtaining the seperately packaged systemVMs in package-manager format. If you really wanted to, you could even break out the KVM vs Xen vs VMWare into separate packages to help reduce size and increase modularity. Then you still are hooking into the turnkey-method since it lends itself to a apt-get upgrade or yum upgrade, and can update components individually and maintain that certain versions of SystemVMs require certain cloudstack versions and vice-versa. Thanks, -Nathan McGarvey On 9/2/21 9:29 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote: > Hi Hean, > > Yes I think the old approach of registering systemvm template prior to > upgrade as well as the option to switch between systemvmtemplate continues to > be supported. What this feature primarily aims is to make CloudStack turnkey > operationally. > > May I ask if anyone has any objections on the increased package size? Due to > the trade off of including systemvmtemplates in the management package the > size increased to about 1-1.5GB which is the only thing I didn't like. > However I think this can be optimised in future releases. > > Regards. > > From: Hean Seng > Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2021 7:34:32 AM > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org > Cc: d...@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements > > This is good idea. Or else , we shall allow manual upload via. GUI, and > mark for system template . > > On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 9:08 PM Pearl d'Silva > wrote: > >> I probably missed adding the PR link to the feature - >> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/4329. Please do provide you >> inputs. >> >> >> Thanks, >> Pearl >> >> ________ >> From: Pearl d'Silva >> Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2021 5:49 PM >> To: d...@cloudstack.apache.org >> Subject: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements >> >> Hi All, >> >> We have been working on a feature that simplifies SystemVM template >> install and upgrades for CloudStack. Historically we've required users to >> seed the template on secondary storage during fresh installation and >> register the template before an upgrade - this really does not make >> CloudStack turnkey, as we end up maintaining and managing them as a >> separate component - for example, users can't simply do an apt-get upgrade >> or yum upgrade to upgrade CloudStack. >> >> The feature works by automatically initiating registration of the SystemVM >> templates during upgrades or when the first secondary storage is added to a >> zone where the SystemVM template hasn't been seeded. This feature addresses >> several operational pain points for example, when the admin user forgets to >> register the SystemVM template prior to an upgrade and faces the issue of >> having to roll back the database midway during the upgrade process. With >> this feature the upgrade process is seamless, such that the end users do >> not need to worry about having to perform template registration, but rather >> have the upgrade process take care of everything that is required. >> >> In order to facilitate this feature, the SystemVM templates have to be >> bundled with the cloudstack-management rpm/deb package which causes t
Re: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements
Hi Hean, Thanks for your response. As mentioned, the usual upgrade procedure, of admins registering template prior upgrade continues to be supported and if we find the new systemvm template already registered the new logic for setting up the templates doesn't kick in. Thanks, Pearl From: Hean Seng Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2021 7:34 AM To: users@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: d...@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements This is good idea. Or else , we shall allow manual upload via. GUI, and mark for system template . On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 9:08 PM Pearl d'Silva wrote: > I probably missed adding the PR link to the feature - > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/4329. Please do provide you > inputs. > > > Thanks, > Pearl > > > From: Pearl d'Silva > Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2021 5:49 PM > To: d...@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements > > Hi All, > > We have been working on a feature that simplifies SystemVM template > install and upgrades for CloudStack. Historically we've required users to > seed the template on secondary storage during fresh installation and > register the template before an upgrade - this really does not make > CloudStack turnkey, as we end up maintaining and managing them as a > separate component - for example, users can't simply do an apt-get upgrade > or yum upgrade to upgrade CloudStack. > > The feature works by automatically initiating registration of the SystemVM > templates during upgrades or when the first secondary storage is added to a > zone where the SystemVM template hasn't been seeded. This feature addresses > several operational pain points for example, when the admin user forgets to > register the SystemVM template prior to an upgrade and faces the issue of > having to roll back the database midway during the upgrade process. With > this feature the upgrade process is seamless, such that the end users do > not need to worry about having to perform template registration, but rather > have the upgrade process take care of everything that is required. > > In order to facilitate this feature, the SystemVM templates have to be > bundled with the cloudstack-management rpm/deb package which causes the > total noredist cloudstack-management package size to increase to about > 1.6GB. We currently are packaging templates of only the three widely > supported hypervisors - KVM, XenServer/XCP-ng and VMWare. > (These templates are only packaged if the build is initiated with the > noredist flag.) > > We'd like to get your opinion on this idea. > > Thanks & Regards, > Pearl Dsilva > > > > > > > -- Regards, Hean Seng
Re: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements
+1 This is also helpful for restricted-from-internet installations. (E.g. places with on-site installs and strong firewall/proxy/air-gap rules.) Which is a feature that is increasingly hard to come by for cloud-based underpinnings, but increasingly of interest for many organizations who like to have control of where their data resides. (Banks, medical institutions, governments, etc.) Should it be in the same packaging, or be a separate package entirely? That way the current packaging could still remain as-is but have the option of obtaining the seperately packaged systemVMs in package-manager format. If you really wanted to, you could even break out the KVM vs Xen vs VMWare into separate packages to help reduce size and increase modularity. Then you still are hooking into the turnkey-method since it lends itself to a apt-get upgrade or yum upgrade, and can update components individually and maintain that certain versions of SystemVMs require certain cloudstack versions and vice-versa. Thanks, -Nathan McGarvey On 9/2/21 9:29 AM, Rohit Yadav wrote: > Hi Hean, > > Yes I think the old approach of registering systemvm template prior to > upgrade as well as the option to switch between systemvmtemplate continues to > be supported. What this feature primarily aims is to make CloudStack turnkey > operationally. > > May I ask if anyone has any objections on the increased package size? Due to > the trade off of including systemvmtemplates in the management package the > size increased to about 1-1.5GB which is the only thing I didn't like. > However I think this can be optimised in future releases. > > Regards. > > From: Hean Seng > Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2021 7:34:32 AM > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org > Cc: d...@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements > > This is good idea. Or else , we shall allow manual upload via. GUI, and > mark for system template . > > On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 9:08 PM Pearl d'Silva > wrote: > >> I probably missed adding the PR link to the feature - >> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/4329. Please do provide you >> inputs. >> >> >> Thanks, >> Pearl >> >> ________ >> From: Pearl d'Silva >> Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2021 5:49 PM >> To: d...@cloudstack.apache.org >> Subject: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements >> >> Hi All, >> >> We have been working on a feature that simplifies SystemVM template >> install and upgrades for CloudStack. Historically we've required users to >> seed the template on secondary storage during fresh installation and >> register the template before an upgrade - this really does not make >> CloudStack turnkey, as we end up maintaining and managing them as a >> separate component - for example, users can't simply do an apt-get upgrade >> or yum upgrade to upgrade CloudStack. >> >> The feature works by automatically initiating registration of the SystemVM >> templates during upgrades or when the first secondary storage is added to a >> zone where the SystemVM template hasn't been seeded. This feature addresses >> several operational pain points for example, when the admin user forgets to >> register the SystemVM template prior to an upgrade and faces the issue of >> having to roll back the database midway during the upgrade process. With >> this feature the upgrade process is seamless, such that the end users do >> not need to worry about having to perform template registration, but rather >> have the upgrade process take care of everything that is required. >> >> In order to facilitate this feature, the SystemVM templates have to be >> bundled with the cloudstack-management rpm/deb package which causes the >> total noredist cloudstack-management package size to increase to about >> 1.6GB. We currently are packaging templates of only the three widely >> supported hypervisors - KVM, XenServer/XCP-ng and VMWare. >> (These templates are only packaged if the build is initiated with the >> noredist flag.) >> >> We'd like to get your opinion on this idea. >> >> Thanks & Regards, >> Pearl Dsilva >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- > Regards, > Hean Seng > > > >
Re: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements
Hi Hean, Yes I think the old approach of registering systemvm template prior to upgrade as well as the option to switch between systemvmtemplate continues to be supported. What this feature primarily aims is to make CloudStack turnkey operationally. May I ask if anyone has any objections on the increased package size? Due to the trade off of including systemvmtemplates in the management package the size increased to about 1-1.5GB which is the only thing I didn't like. However I think this can be optimised in future releases. Regards. From: Hean Seng Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2021 7:34:32 AM To: users@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: d...@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements This is good idea. Or else , we shall allow manual upload via. GUI, and mark for system template . On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 9:08 PM Pearl d'Silva wrote: > I probably missed adding the PR link to the feature - > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/4329. Please do provide you > inputs. > > > Thanks, > Pearl > > > From: Pearl d'Silva > Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2021 5:49 PM > To: d...@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements > > Hi All, > > We have been working on a feature that simplifies SystemVM template > install and upgrades for CloudStack. Historically we've required users to > seed the template on secondary storage during fresh installation and > register the template before an upgrade - this really does not make > CloudStack turnkey, as we end up maintaining and managing them as a > separate component - for example, users can't simply do an apt-get upgrade > or yum upgrade to upgrade CloudStack. > > The feature works by automatically initiating registration of the SystemVM > templates during upgrades or when the first secondary storage is added to a > zone where the SystemVM template hasn't been seeded. This feature addresses > several operational pain points for example, when the admin user forgets to > register the SystemVM template prior to an upgrade and faces the issue of > having to roll back the database midway during the upgrade process. With > this feature the upgrade process is seamless, such that the end users do > not need to worry about having to perform template registration, but rather > have the upgrade process take care of everything that is required. > > In order to facilitate this feature, the SystemVM templates have to be > bundled with the cloudstack-management rpm/deb package which causes the > total noredist cloudstack-management package size to increase to about > 1.6GB. We currently are packaging templates of only the three widely > supported hypervisors - KVM, XenServer/XCP-ng and VMWare. > (These templates are only packaged if the build is initiated with the > noredist flag.) > > We'd like to get your opinion on this idea. > > Thanks & Regards, > Pearl Dsilva > > > > > > > -- Regards, Hean Seng
Re: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements
This is good idea. Or else , we shall allow manual upload via. GUI, and mark for system template . On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 9:08 PM Pearl d'Silva wrote: > I probably missed adding the PR link to the feature - > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/4329. Please do provide you > inputs. > > > Thanks, > Pearl > > > From: Pearl d'Silva > Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2021 5:49 PM > To: d...@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements > > Hi All, > > We have been working on a feature that simplifies SystemVM template > install and upgrades for CloudStack. Historically we've required users to > seed the template on secondary storage during fresh installation and > register the template before an upgrade - this really does not make > CloudStack turnkey, as we end up maintaining and managing them as a > separate component - for example, users can't simply do an apt-get upgrade > or yum upgrade to upgrade CloudStack. > > The feature works by automatically initiating registration of the SystemVM > templates during upgrades or when the first secondary storage is added to a > zone where the SystemVM template hasn't been seeded. This feature addresses > several operational pain points for example, when the admin user forgets to > register the SystemVM template prior to an upgrade and faces the issue of > having to roll back the database midway during the upgrade process. With > this feature the upgrade process is seamless, such that the end users do > not need to worry about having to perform template registration, but rather > have the upgrade process take care of everything that is required. > > In order to facilitate this feature, the SystemVM templates have to be > bundled with the cloudstack-management rpm/deb package which causes the > total noredist cloudstack-management package size to increase to about > 1.6GB. We currently are packaging templates of only the three widely > supported hypervisors - KVM, XenServer/XCP-ng and VMWare. > (These templates are only packaged if the build is initiated with the > noredist flag.) > > We'd like to get your opinion on this idea. > > Thanks & Regards, > Pearl Dsilva > > > > > > > -- Regards, Hean Seng
Re: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements
I probably missed adding the PR link to the feature - https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/4329. Please do provide you inputs. Thanks, Pearl From: Pearl d'Silva Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2021 5:49 PM To: d...@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: [DISCUSS] SystemVM template upgrade improvements Hi All, We have been working on a feature that simplifies SystemVM template install and upgrades for CloudStack. Historically we've required users to seed the template on secondary storage during fresh installation and register the template before an upgrade - this really does not make CloudStack turnkey, as we end up maintaining and managing them as a separate component - for example, users can't simply do an apt-get upgrade or yum upgrade to upgrade CloudStack. The feature works by automatically initiating registration of the SystemVM templates during upgrades or when the first secondary storage is added to a zone where the SystemVM template hasn't been seeded. This feature addresses several operational pain points for example, when the admin user forgets to register the SystemVM template prior to an upgrade and faces the issue of having to roll back the database midway during the upgrade process. With this feature the upgrade process is seamless, such that the end users do not need to worry about having to perform template registration, but rather have the upgrade process take care of everything that is required. In order to facilitate this feature, the SystemVM templates have to be bundled with the cloudstack-management rpm/deb package which causes the total noredist cloudstack-management package size to increase to about 1.6GB. We currently are packaging templates of only the three widely supported hypervisors - KVM, XenServer/XCP-ng and VMWare. (These templates are only packaged if the build is initiated with the noredist flag.) We'd like to get your opinion on this idea. Thanks & Regards, Pearl Dsilva
