[one-users] Xen4 issues with nic-attach and ebtables vnm driver
Hello, We are testing opennebula 4.6 with xen4 drivers on debian 7 servers, it looks really great. We created our own storage drivers to match our current setup, we did it using ruby and they are working great so far. We are now testing the network drivers as well as adding/removing nics/ips to a running vm. In our current setup we add ip aliases to the vm's eth0 nic and add some ebtables rules on the hypervisor host. How is this supposed to be done in opennebula? We tried the onevm nic-attach command and it hot-plugged the nic correctly, but it is lost from the vm once it is rebooted. The vm template keeps the nic, but xen is not aware of it, the deployment file is not changed. If we re-deploy (undeploy resume) the deployment file is correctly updated and xen is aware of the interface, but it needs a downtime we can not always afford. Is this a bug? is there something I'm missing? Does anyone have a similar issue/solution? Another issue we have found is with the ebtables VNM driver, it just won't add any rule. Firewall rules are correctly implemented but not the ebtables ones. On the logs we found the following message: [VMM][D]: Message received: LOG E 10 A different toolstack (xl) have been selected! We found that NicXen class on OpenNebulaNic.rb doesn't use the new xl command but xm from xen3, we changed the code to use xl command but we still get the same message and no rules are added. I guess there other piece of code still using xm but I couldn't find it. Do you have any advice on where to look? Thanks in advance, Jorge ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opennebula.org http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org
[one-users] FrontEnd can't copy (cp) image to Node1
Hi, I am new user My objectives context : Scenario = http://wiki.centos.org/Cloud/OpenNebula/QuickStart Vbox FrontEnd + Node1 ssh passwordless auth ok I can't log from Chrome with username oneadmin -- I create and use toto (in the same group) Error (see attached file) FrontEnd can't copy image to Node1 I can copy manually with scp !!! Help me to configure correctly my datastore and driver Thanks / Gerald - www.tdeig.ch Lab_OpenNebula.pdf Description: Adobe PDF document ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opennebula.org http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org
Re: [one-users] Quota for vCPU
Hi, On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Ondrej Hamada ondrej.ham...@acision.com wrote: Some sort of vCPU quota might be good idea in case the users are allowed to create their own templates. They are able to rise the count of vCPU sky high if their app goes too slow. In KVM the vCPU presents the number of threads the virtual machine could use. Setting too many vCPUs for several VMs on a same host might kill the hypervisor because of the context switching. Ondra True. Maybe it's too restrictive, but you can disable VCPU for end users with the vm restricted attributes [1] and set a default in the driver [2]. Regards [1] http://docs.opennebula.org/4.6/administration/references/oned_conf.html#restricted-attributes-configuration [2] http://docs.opennebula.org/4.6/administration/virtualization/kvmg.html#default-attributes -- Carlos Martín, MSc Project Engineer OpenNebula - Flexible Enterprise Cloud Made Simple www.OpenNebula.org http://www.opennebula.org/ | cmar...@opennebula.org | @OpenNebula http://twitter.com/opennebula cmar...@opennebula.org On 07/28/2014 12:16 PM, Carlos Martín Sánchez wrote: Hi, On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Mateusz Skała mateusz.sk...@budikom.net wrote: Hi, It is possible to set up quota for vCPU? I see only quota for CPU. No, it's not possible, but it does not matter because the vCPU is virtual. It does not mater if a user defines 1 or 10 vCPU, the amount of physical host cpu assigned to the VM is determined by the CPU attribute. Regards. -- Carlos Martín, MSc Project Engineer OpenNebula - Flexible Enterprise Cloud Made Simple www.OpenNebula.org http://www.opennebula.org/ | cmar...@opennebula.org | @OpenNebula http://twitter.com/opennebula ___ Users mailing listUsers@lists.opennebula.orghttp://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org -- This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you for understanding. ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opennebula.org http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opennebula.org http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org
Re: [one-users] balancing VM placement
Hi, On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Mark Devlin mdev...@intelius.com wrote: Greetings, Is there a way, using 4.4 or newer, for the scheduler to place VMs based on their names? No, but you can set a specific SCHED_REQUIREMENTS and _RANK in the Template [1] Basically I want to spread a type of VM across as many hosts as possible, as long as the hosts have available resources for it. For example, if I have four hosts that have VMs and one that's empty, I don't want the five (web1-web5) VMs I'm about about to instantiate to all end up on that empty host. I want one on each host. However, if I start three more (web6-web8), it should place based on available resources. Hopefully that makes sense. Thank you -Mark That's how the scheduler works by default [2]. The policy is Striping, and MAX_HOST is set to 1. The striping policy will try to send the VMs to the host with less running VMs, but because of max_host = 1, only one VM will be sent to the empty host in that scheduling cycle. If you change the default policy, use SCHED_RANK = - RUNNING_VMS in your Template. Regards [1] http://docs.opennebula.org/4.6/user/references/template.html#placement-section [2] http://docs.opennebula.org/4.6/administration/references/schg.html -- Carlos Martín, MSc Project Engineer OpenNebula - Flexible Enterprise Cloud Made Simple www.OpenNebula.org http://www.opennebula.org/ | cmar...@opennebula.org | @OpenNebula http://twitter.com/opennebula cmar...@opennebula.org ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opennebula.org http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org
Re: [one-users] VM is always using a single CPU
On 08/01/2014 03:44 PM, Steffen Claus wrote: Did you configure the value for vCPU as well? It was not set at all. Adding it indeed add some core to the VM, but this is a little misleading But should CPU be equal to VCPU for full CPU usage? (I want to really use 2 cores = CPU = 2, VCPU = 2) Thanks Hi, I have an issue with CPUs, all my VMs have a single CPU whatever is set in my sunstone template. Executed command is: /usr/bin/kvm -S -M pc-0.12 -enable-kvm -m 2048 -smp 1,sockets=1,cores=1,threads=1 while in my template in sunstone I see : CPU 2 I expect to have here 2 CPUs. The generated deployment file is below: domain type='kvm' xmlns:qemu='http://libvirt.org/schemas/domain/qemu/1.0' nameone-984/name cputune shares2048/shares /cputune memory2097152/memory os type arch='x86_64'hvm/type boot dev='hd'/ /os devices emulator/usr/bin/kvm/emulator disk type='file' device='disk' source file='/var/lib/one//datastores/0/984/disk.0'/ target dev='vda'/ driver name='qemu' type='raw' cache='none'/ /disk disk type='file' device='cdrom' source file='/var/lib/one//datastores/0/984/disk.1'/ target dev='hda'/ readonly/ driver name='qemu' type='raw'/ /disk interface type='bridge' source bridge='br0'/ mac address='00:04:c0:a8:02:40'/ /interface graphics type='vnc' listen='0.0.0.0' port='6884' keymap='fr'/ /devices features acpi/ /features /domain Could you explain what is wrong ? I am using OpenNebula 4.2 (expecting an upgrade soon...) Thanks Olivier -- gpg key id: 4096R/326D8438 (keyring.debian.org) Key fingerprint = 5FB4 6F83 D3B9 5204 6335 D26D 78DC 68DB 326D 8438 ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opennebula.org http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org -- Steffen Claus Fraunhofer-Institut für Algorithmen und Wissenschaftliches Rechnen (SCAI) Schloss Birlinghoven D-53754 Sankt Augustin Tel: +49 2241 14-2511 steffen.cl...@scai.fraunhofer.de http://www.scai.fraunhofer.de -- Olivier Sallou IRISA / University of Rennes 1 Campus de Beaulieu, 35000 RENNES - FRANCE Tel: 02.99.84.71.95 gpg key id: 4096R/326D8438 (keyring.debian.org) Key fingerprint = 5FB4 6F83 D3B9 5204 6335 D26D 78DC 68DB 326D 8438 ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opennebula.org http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org
Re: [one-users] FrontEnd can't copy (cp) image to Node1
Hi, OpenNebula is not trying to scp the image from the frontend to node1, because you are using the shared TM driver for the datastores. The file is assumed to be already present in node1, but it can't be found. You need to make sure /var/lib/one/datastores/ is correctly shared (e.g. nfs), or change the TM drivers to ssh. You will need passwordless ssh for this. You can read more in the storage guides: http://docs.opennebula.org/4.6/administration/storage/sm.html Regards -- Carlos Martín, MSc Project Engineer OpenNebula - Flexible Enterprise Cloud Made Simple www.OpenNebula.org | cmar...@opennebula.org | @OpenNebula http://twitter.com/opennebula cmar...@opennebula.org On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 4:16 PM, Gérald Litzistorf gerald.litzist...@hesge.ch wrote: Hi, I am new user My objectives context : Scenario = http://wiki.centos.org/Cloud/OpenNebula/QuickStart Vbox FrontEnd + Node1 ssh passwordless auth ok I can't log from Chrome with username oneadmin -- I create and use toto (in the same group) Error (see attached file) FrontEnd can't copy image to Node1 I can copy manually with scp !!! Help me to configure correctly my datastore and driver Thanks / Gerald - www.tdeig.ch ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opennebula.org http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opennebula.org http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org
[one-users] Fencing and/or STONITH in case of an host error (ft/host_error.rb)
Hi, in my OpenNebula environments i used a combination of Pacemaker and Corosync for monitoring the VMM host of a cluster, where proper checking of libvirt was crucial, to perform fencing and/or STONITH actions in case of a host failure. OpenNebula / oned triggers a failover of the VMs with the HOST_HOOK on ERROR (ft/host_error.rb). Since several troubles with Corosync/Pacemaker (e.g. monitoring timeout of fencing device (IPMI/ILO-Module)) i decided to implement fencing / STONITH in the host_error.rb-Hook which triggers the failover (--delete --recreate). I think this is the right place for adding those functions? Therefore i added some attributes to the host templates (ILO_IP, ILO_USER, ILO_PASS - we use HP Servers with iLO-modules): MONITORING INFORMATION ARCH=x86_64 CPUSPEED=1999 CPUSPEED=1999 HOSTNAME=lab-cloud-staging-node-03 HYPERVISOR=kvm HYPERVISOR=kvm ILO_IP=IP.IP.IP.IP ILO_PASS=USERNAME ILO_USER=PASSWORD MODELNAME=Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5335 @ 2.00GHz ... To access these attributes i changed the configuration of the hook in oned.conf: HOST_HOOK = [ name = error, on= ERROR, command = /var/lib/one/remotes/hooks/ft/host_error.rb, arguments = $ID $TEMPLATE -d -r, remote= no ] In the next step i modified the host_error.rb-Hook to trigger the STONITH-action in case of an host error. For that i included rubyipmi, base64 and nokogiri gem in the hook and added some (primitive, i`m not a programmer :) lines of code: start # ILO/BMC IP Base = $TEMPLATE if !(host_template=ARGV[1]) exit -1 end host_template_decoded=Base64.decode64(host_template) xml=Nokogiri::Slop(host_template_decoded) ilo_ip=xml.HOST.TEMPLATE.ILO_IP.content ilo_user=xml.HOST.TEMPLATE.ILO_USER.content ilo_pass=xml.HOST.TEMPLATE.ILO_PASS.content # Method UID LED activate def uidled(ilo_ip, ilo_pass, ilo_user) conn = Rubyipmi.connect(ilo_user, ilo_pass, ilo_ip, ipmitool) # 86400 Sekunden = 1 Tag value = conn.chassis.identify(true, 86400) puts value sleep (2) end # Methode Hard-Reset by iLO/BMC def stonith(ilo_ip, ilo_pass, ilo_user) conn = Rubyipmi.connect(ilo_user, ilo_pass, ilo_ip, ipmitool) value = conn.chassis.power.cycle puts value sleep (10) end # trigger uidled and stonith uidled(ilo_ip, ilo_pass, ilo_user) stonith(ilo_ip, ilo_pass, ilo_user) /stop Is this the right way to trigger fencing actions with OpenNebula, or are there better ways to implement fencing/STONITH - how do you implement it? Perhaps virtual machine disk locking (e.g. SANLOCK) could be a solution for some environments? I think there is (currently) a lack of a proper fencing mechanism in OpenNebula, isn`t it? Best regards, Sebastian. ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opennebula.org http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org
Re: [one-users] balancing VM placement
We're using the (mostly) default scheduler settings. policy=1, MAX_HOST=1, etc. My question came about because we had an empty host and instantiated a number of VMs, and they all landed on the empty host. I have no doubt we have something funky in our setup. I'll have to experiment with the scheduler more. Thanks for the quick reply, Carlos. On Aug 1, 2014, at 7:47 AM, Carlos Martín Sánchez cmar...@opennebula.orgmailto:cmar...@opennebula.org wrote: Hi, On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Mark Devlin mdev...@intelius.commailto:mdev...@intelius.com wrote: Greetings, Is there a way, using 4.4 or newer, for the scheduler to place VMs based on their names? No, but you can set a specific SCHED_REQUIREMENTS and _RANK in the Template [1] Basically I want to spread a type of VM across as many hosts as possible, as long as the hosts have available resources for it. For example, if I have four hosts that have VMs and one that's empty, I don't want the five (web1-web5) VMs I'm about about to instantiate to all end up on that empty host. I want one on each host. However, if I start three more (web6-web8), it should place based on available resources. Hopefully that makes sense. Thank you -Mark That's how the scheduler works by default [2]. The policy is Striping, and MAX_HOST is set to 1. The striping policy will try to send the VMs to the host with less running VMs, but because of max_host = 1, only one VM will be sent to the empty host in that scheduling cycle. If you change the default policy, use SCHED_RANK = - RUNNING_VMS in your Template. Regards [1] http://docs.opennebula.org/4.6/user/references/template.html#placement-section [2] http://docs.opennebula.org/4.6/administration/references/schg.html -- Carlos Martín, MSc Project Engineer OpenNebula - Flexible Enterprise Cloud Made Simple www.OpenNebula.orghttp://www.opennebula.org/ | cmar...@opennebula.orgmailto:cmar...@opennebula.org | @OpenNebulahttp://twitter.com/opennebulamailto:cmar...@opennebula.org ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opennebula.org http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org
Re: [one-users] VM is always using a single CPU
Hi Olivier, as far as I know, the CPU attribute in One is used by scheduler only in order to decide how much CPU is consumed on hosts. It has no effect on VM unless you are using cgroups. The vCPU sets how many threads could be used by the VM. The number of vCPU in Nebula determines the number of sockets in '-smp' option of KVM. Ad setting number of CPU: Let's look on following example: my hypervisor has two quad-core CPUs with hyperthreadig giving me 16 threads in total. In such case Nebula presents the CPU value of 1600 for the hypervisor. Now I decide that I do not want to run more than 20 VMs on such hyperviso, so 1600/20=80. But because Nebula divides these values by 100, you get 80/100 = 0.8. So if you want to run no more than 20 VMs on 16 threads, you shoud set the CPU value of the templates to 0.8. Ondra On 08/01/2014 05:07 PM, Olivier Sallou wrote: On 08/01/2014 03:44 PM, Steffen Claus wrote: Did you configure the value for vCPU as well? It was not set at all. Adding it indeed add some core to the VM, but this is a little misleading But should CPU be equal to VCPU for full CPU usage? (I want to really use 2 cores = CPU = 2, VCPU = 2) Thanks Hi, I have an issue with CPUs, all my VMs have a single CPU whatever is set in my sunstone template. Executed command is: /usr/bin/kvm -S -M pc-0.12 -enable-kvm -m 2048 -smp 1,sockets=1,cores=1,threads=1 while in my template in sunstone I see : CPU 2 I expect to have here 2 CPUs. The generated deployment file is below: domain type='kvm' xmlns:qemu='http://libvirt.org/schemas/domain/qemu/1.0' nameone-984/name cputune shares2048/shares /cputune memory2097152/memory os type arch='x86_64'hvm/type boot dev='hd'/ /os devices emulator/usr/bin/kvm/emulator disk type='file' device='disk' source file='/var/lib/one//datastores/0/984/disk.0'/ target dev='vda'/ driver name='qemu' type='raw' cache='none'/ /disk disk type='file' device='cdrom' source file='/var/lib/one//datastores/0/984/disk.1'/ target dev='hda'/ readonly/ driver name='qemu' type='raw'/ /disk interface type='bridge' source bridge='br0'/ mac address='00:04:c0:a8:02:40'/ /interface graphics type='vnc' listen='0.0.0.0' port='6884' keymap='fr'/ /devices features acpi/ /features /domain Could you explain what is wrong ? I am using OpenNebula 4.2 (expecting an upgrade soon...) Thanks Olivier -- gpg key id: 4096R/326D8438 (keyring.debian.org) Key fingerprint = 5FB4 6F83 D3B9 5204 6335 D26D 78DC 68DB 326D 8438 ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opennebula.orgmailto:Users@lists.opennebula.org http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org -- Steffen Claus Fraunhofer-Institut für Algorithmen und Wissenschaftliches Rechnen (SCAI) Schloss Birlinghoven D-53754 Sankt Augustin Tel: +49 2241 14-2511 steffen.cl...@scai.fraunhofer.demailto:steffen.cl...@scai.fraunhofer.de http://www.scai.fraunhofer.de -- Olivier Sallou IRISA / University of Rennes 1 Campus de Beaulieu, 35000 RENNES - FRANCE Tel: 02.99.84.71.95 gpg key id: 4096R/326D8438 (keyring.debian.org) Key fingerprint = 5FB4 6F83 D3B9 5204 6335 D26D 78DC 68DB 326D 8438 ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opennebula.orgmailto:Users@lists.opennebula.org http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org This e-mail and any attachment is for authorised use by the intended recipient(s) only. It may contain proprietary material, confidential information and/or be subject to legal privilege. It should not be copied, disclosed to, retained or used by, any other party. If you are not an intended recipient then please promptly delete this e-mail and any attachment and all copies and inform the sender. Thank you for understanding. ___ Users mailing list Users@lists.opennebula.org http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org
