Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
Il 23/09/2013 14:11, Mike Burns ha scritto: On 09/23/2013 03:51 AM, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: Il 17/09/2013 00:48, Mike Burns ha scritto: On 09/16/2013 06:41 PM, H. Haven Liu wrote: Thanks for the discussion. But for those of us that are not using gluster, but just good ol' NFS, is updating simply yum update ovirt-*? No, yum update won't upgrade ovirt packages. If you're running on Fedora, you need to update Fedora first, then run engine-upgrade. If you're on EL6, a simple engine-upgrade should work. Ofer, any other gotchas? Can you have someone create a 3.2 to 3.3 upgrade page on the wiki? Here you can find the test results of upgrading from Fedora 18 / oVirt 3.2 to Fedora 19 oVirt 3.3: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1005950 I'm a bit short on time, but I can try to find some for creating that page. Any preference on the URL / page name? Previous ones exist like this: http://www.ovirt.org/OVirt_3.0_to_3.1_upgrade http://www.ovirt.org/OVirt_3.1_to_3.2_upgrade so this would make sense: http://www.ovirt.org/OVirt_3.2_to_3.2_upgrade Created http://www.ovirt.org/OVirt_3.2_to_3.3_upgrade Thanks Mike On Sep 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so that it will work for people on EL6. From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're looking at whether we can have a virt-preview type of repo for EL6 similar to what exists today for Fedora[1]. Thanks Mike [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
Il 17/09/2013 00:48, Mike Burns ha scritto: On 09/16/2013 06:41 PM, H. Haven Liu wrote: Thanks for the discussion. But for those of us that are not using gluster, but just good ol' NFS, is updating simply yum update ovirt-*? No, yum update won't upgrade ovirt packages. If you're running on Fedora, you need to update Fedora first, then run engine-upgrade. If you're on EL6, a simple engine-upgrade should work. Ofer, any other gotchas? Can you have someone create a 3.2 to 3.3 upgrade page on the wiki? Here you can find the test results of upgrading from Fedora 18 / oVirt 3.2 to Fedora 19 oVirt 3.3: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1005950 I'm a bit short on time, but I can try to find some for creating that page. Any preference on the URL / page name? Thanks Mike On Sep 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so that it will work for people on EL6. From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're looking at whether we can have a virt-preview type of repo for EL6 similar to what exists today for Fedora[1]. Thanks Mike [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
On 09/23/2013 03:51 AM, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: Il 17/09/2013 00:48, Mike Burns ha scritto: On 09/16/2013 06:41 PM, H. Haven Liu wrote: Thanks for the discussion. But for those of us that are not using gluster, but just good ol' NFS, is updating simply yum update ovirt-*? No, yum update won't upgrade ovirt packages. If you're running on Fedora, you need to update Fedora first, then run engine-upgrade. If you're on EL6, a simple engine-upgrade should work. Ofer, any other gotchas? Can you have someone create a 3.2 to 3.3 upgrade page on the wiki? Here you can find the test results of upgrading from Fedora 18 / oVirt 3.2 to Fedora 19 oVirt 3.3: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1005950 I'm a bit short on time, but I can try to find some for creating that page. Any preference on the URL / page name? Previous ones exist like this: http://www.ovirt.org/OVirt_3.0_to_3.1_upgrade http://www.ovirt.org/OVirt_3.1_to_3.2_upgrade so this would make sense: http://www.ovirt.org/OVirt_3.2_to_3.2_upgrade Thanks Mike On Sep 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so that it will work for people on EL6. From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're looking at whether we can have a virt-preview type of repo for EL6 similar to what exists today for Fedora[1]. Thanks Mike [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
Apparently that's not it. I reinstalled the hosts and managed to get the DC to v3.3, and the VMs are showing up as Cluster Compatibility Version: 3.3, but resize Disk is still no-go. On Sep 23, 2013, at 9:13 AM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/23/2013 12:11 PM, H. Haven Liu wrote: I was able to upgrade with engine-setup after running yum update ovirt-engine-setup as requested. The upgrade processes completed successfully (at least according to [ INFO ] Execution of upgrade completed successfully) However, it appears I'm unable to gain the benefits of 3.3, such as Online Virtual Drive Resize[1], which I'm guessing has something to do with that my VMs still report that the Cluster Compatibility Version as 3.2. Is there any way to update the VMs or otherwise enable that feature? [1]http://www.ovirt.org/Features/Online_Virtual_Drive_Resize On Sep 23, 2013, at 5:11 AM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com mailto:mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/23/2013 03:51 AM, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: Il 17/09/2013 00:48, Mike Burns ha scritto: On 09/16/2013 06:41 PM, H. Haven Liu wrote: Thanks for the discussion. But for those of us that are not using gluster, but just good ol' NFS, is updating simply yum update ovirt-*? No, yum update won't upgrade ovirt packages. If you're running on Fedora, you need to update Fedora first, then run engine-upgrade. If you're on EL6, a simple engine-upgrade should work. Ofer, any other gotchas? Can you have someone create a 3.2 to 3.3 upgrade page on the wiki? Here you can find the test results of upgrading from Fedora 18 / oVirt 3.2 to Fedora 19 oVirt 3.3: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1005950 I'm a bit short on time, but I can try to find some for creating that page. Any preference on the URL / page name? Previous ones exist like this: http://www.ovirt.org/OVirt_3.0_to_3.1_upgrade http://www.ovirt.org/OVirt_3.1_to_3.2_upgrade so this would make sense: http://www.ovirt.org/OVirt_3.2_to_3.2_upgrade Thanks Mike On Sep 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so that it will work for people on EL6. From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're looking at whether we can have a virt-preview type of repo for EL6 similar to what exists today for Fedora[1]. Thanks Mike [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
On 09/23/2013 12:11 PM, H. Haven Liu wrote: I was able to upgrade with engine-setup after running yum update ovirt-engine-setup as requested. The upgrade processes completed successfully (at least according to [ INFO ] Execution of upgrade completed successfully) However, it appears I'm unable to gain the benefits of 3.3, such as Online Virtual Drive Resize[1], which I'm guessing has something to do with that my VMs still report that the Cluster Compatibility Version as 3.2. Is there any way to update the VMs or otherwise enable that feature? [1]http://www.ovirt.org/Features/Online_Virtual_Drive_Resize On Sep 23, 2013, at 5:11 AM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com mailto:mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/23/2013 03:51 AM, Sandro Bonazzola wrote: Il 17/09/2013 00:48, Mike Burns ha scritto: On 09/16/2013 06:41 PM, H. Haven Liu wrote: Thanks for the discussion. But for those of us that are not using gluster, but just good ol' NFS, is updating simply yum update ovirt-*? No, yum update won't upgrade ovirt packages. If you're running on Fedora, you need to update Fedora first, then run engine-upgrade. If you're on EL6, a simple engine-upgrade should work. Ofer, any other gotchas? Can you have someone create a 3.2 to 3.3 upgrade page on the wiki? Here you can find the test results of upgrading from Fedora 18 / oVirt 3.2 to Fedora 19 oVirt 3.3: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1005950 I'm a bit short on time, but I can try to find some for creating that page. Any preference on the URL / page name? Previous ones exist like this: http://www.ovirt.org/OVirt_3.0_to_3.1_upgrade http://www.ovirt.org/OVirt_3.1_to_3.2_upgrade so this would make sense: http://www.ovirt.org/OVirt_3.2_to_3.2_upgrade Thanks Mike On Sep 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so that it will work for people on EL6. From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're looking at whether we can have a virt-preview type of repo for EL6 similar to what exists today for Fedora[1]. Thanks Mike [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
Hi, I just updated our oVirt 3.2 test setup to 3.3 without problems. One thing seems to be changed. instead of running engine-upgrade you need to run ovirt-setup _Vincent On 09/16/2013 06:41 PM, H. Haven Liu wrote: Thanks for the discussion. But for those of us that are not using gluster, but just good ol' NFS, is updating simply yum update ovirt-*? No, yum update won't upgrade ovirt packages. If you're running on Fedora, you need to update Fedora first, then run engine-upgrade. If you're on EL6, a simple engine-upgrade should work. Ofer, any other gotchas? Can you have someone create a 3.2 to 3.3 upgrade page on the wiki? Thanks Mike On Sep 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so that it will work for people on EL6. From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're looking at whether we can have a virt-preview type of repo for EL6 similar to what exists today for Fedora[1]. Thanks Mike [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users -- Vincent Van der Kussen @vincentvdk ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
On 09/21/2013 06:16 PM, Vincent Van der Kussen wrote: Hi, I just updated our oVirt 3.2 test setup to 3.3 without problems. One thing seems to be changed. instead of running engine-upgrade you need to run ovirt-setup that's worth either having a symlink for, or updating release notes / various places in wiki mentioning this. _Vincent On 09/16/2013 06:41 PM, H. Haven Liu wrote: Thanks for the discussion. But for those of us that are not using gluster, but just good ol' NFS, is updating simply yum update ovirt-*? No, yum update won't upgrade ovirt packages. If you're running on Fedora, you need to update Fedora first, then run engine-upgrade. If you're on EL6, a simple engine-upgrade should work. Ofer, any other gotchas? Can you have someone create a 3.2 to 3.3 upgrade page on the wiki? Thanks Mike On Sep 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so that it will work for people on EL6. From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're looking at whether we can have a virt-preview type of repo for EL6 similar to what exists today for Fedora[1]. Thanks Mike [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
On 09/21/2013 06:16 PM, Vincent Van der Kussen wrote: Hi, I just updated our oVirt 3.2 test setup to 3.3 without problems. One thing seems to be changed. instead of running engine-upgrade you need to run ovirt-setup that's worth either having a symlink for, or updating release notes / various places in wiki mentioning this. This is mentioned when running engine-upgrade. _Vincent On 09/16/2013 06:41 PM, H. Haven Liu wrote: Thanks for the discussion. But for those of us that are not using gluster, but just good ol' NFS, is updating simply yum update ovirt-*? No, yum update won't upgrade ovirt packages. If you're running on Fedora, you need to update Fedora first, then run engine-upgrade. If you're on EL6, a simple engine-upgrade should work. Ofer, any other gotchas? Can you have someone create a 3.2 to 3.3 upgrade page on the wiki? Thanks Mike On Sep 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so that it will work for people on EL6. From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're looking at whether we can have a virt-preview type of repo for EL6 similar to what exists today for Fedora[1]. Thanks Mike [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users -- Vincent Van der Kussen @vincentvdk ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
[Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Thanks, Haven ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks Mike Regards, Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. Regards, Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so that it will work for people on EL6. From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're looking at whether we can have a virt-preview type of repo for EL6 similar to what exists today for Fedora[1]. Thanks Mike [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
Thanks for the discussion. But for those of us that are not using gluster, but just good ol' NFS, is updating simply yum update ovirt-*? On Sep 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so that it will work for people on EL6. From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're looking at whether we can have a virt-preview type of repo for EL6 similar to what exists today for Fedora[1]. Thanks Mike [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Re: [Users] Update from 3.2 to 3.3 (CentOS 6.4)
On 09/16/2013 06:41 PM, H. Haven Liu wrote: Thanks for the discussion. But for those of us that are not using gluster, but just good ol' NFS, is updating simply yum update ovirt-*? No, yum update won't upgrade ovirt packages. If you're running on Fedora, you need to update Fedora first, then run engine-upgrade. If you're on EL6, a simple engine-upgrade should work. Ofer, any other gotchas? Can you have someone create a 3.2 to 3.3 upgrade page on the wiki? Thanks Mike On Sep 16, 2013, at 2:54 PM, Mike Burns mbu...@redhat.com wrote: On 09/16/2013 05:26 PM, Joop wrote: Mike Burns wrote: On 09/16/2013 04:30 PM, Joop wrote: H. Haven Liu wrote: Hello, Is there any recommended procedure for updating from 3.2 to 3.3 (namely on a CentOS 6.4 system), or anything one should be careful when doing such update? Be careful when you use glusterfs, not nfs over glusterfs, but read the release-notes. It should have something to say about glusterfs domain not (yet) working on el6. Saw a small discussion on irc just yet and my two cents are that you can't add el6 support to ovirt in release 3.2 and then withdraw it with 3.3 and say well just wait for Centos/Rhel-6.5. We haven't removed any functionality in 3.3. In 3.2, we added support for gluster domains through a POSIXFS interface. In 3.3, we're adding a feature where we support gluster natively. This works in Fedora, but is not available on EL6. The POSIXFS option still exists You're right but what about users who want to use the (much) improved speed of the gluster domain over the POSIXFS interface? They are left out or they should move to Fed19 which I would do but I need to convince a couple of other people as well and they aren't going to agree. I understand the complaint, honestly. And we're working on a solution so that it will work for people on EL6. From the perspective of whether we should release with this limitation or not, I'd point out that by not releasing, we'd be preventing everyone from using any of the new features until we get a solution for this. I'd rather release and make it available for everyone now and say that the Gluster domain for EL6 will come as soon as we can work out the dependency issues. The kernel can come from elrepo so that is not a burden for the ovirt team, qemu/libvirt should be build by the ovirt team and be available from the ovirt repo. At the moment I also see/saw Jboss-7.1.1 qemu/libvirt wouldn't be the first packages to be in the ovirt-repo which are also in the main distributions repos. We're trying to work out a way to do this in a consistent manner going forward. We should have a solution soon, but in the meantime, the other functionality and features should work on both Fedora and EL6. Thanks for the clarification and I'm waiting eagerly for what/when the solution comes out. There have been a few considerations for solving this including rebuilding pure upstream or fedora packages for EL6. That is a risky solution in my mind since there are rather large deltas between Fedora and EL6. We're looking at whether we can have a virt-preview type of repo for EL6 similar to what exists today for Fedora[1]. Thanks Mike [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Virtualization_Preview_Repository Joop ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users ___ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
