---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/13680/
---
(Updated Aug. 20, 2013, 6:18 a.m.)
Review request for cloudstack, venkata
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/13680/#review25340
---
test/integration/component/test_netscaler_lb.py
Hi Radhika,
New APIs introduced in 4.2 due to Object Storage feature:
addImageStore
createSecondaryStagingStore
listImageStores
listSecondaryStagingStores
From 4.2 onwards we will be using only above APIs to create and list any
secondary storage.
We will not be supporting addS3 and listS3
Hi Daan,
My issue is still unfortunately not resolved, I am unaware what is causing
the excessive 'Disconnect, reconnect' issue.
The functionality Jonathan (?) requires certainly isn't possible in the web
interface, but I'm sure it would be easy to create a script which monitors
VM instances and
Hi Radhika,
Few additions in the section 15.27.11.2 N-Tier InternalLB for VPC feature :
1. In section 15.27.11.2.3 you can mention that there in the network offerings
a default offering for Internal LB is present with the name
DefaultIsolatedNetworkOfferingForVpcNetworksWithInternalLB .
2. In
Congratulations :-)
Sent from my iPhone
On 20 aug. 2013, at 02:55, Go Chiba go.ch...@gmail.com wrote:
Congrats Hatano-san!
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Marcus Sorensen shadow...@gmail.comwrote:
The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack
has asked Toshiaki Hatano
congratulation
On Aug 19, 2013, at 8:55 PM, Go Chiba go.ch...@gmail.com wrote:
Congrats Hatano-san!
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Marcus Sorensen shadow...@gmail.comwrote:
The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack
has asked Toshiaki Hatano to become a committer
Hi Tom,
vmsnapshots are not backed up to secondary storage. They will be stored on
primary itself.
Apart from templates,ISOs and snapshots, volumes will be stored in s3 in the
following scenarios:
1.Upload volume
2.Extract volume(download volume)
Thanks,
Sanjeev
-Original Message-
On Aug. 20, 2013, 6:30 a.m., venkata swamy babu budumuru wrote:
test/integration/component/test_netscaler_lb.py, line 166
https://reviews.apache.org/r/13680/diff/1/?file=342459#file342459line166
Since you have multiple test suites trying to add the same netscaler
device, it will
Hi Radhika,
As discussed with you please find the minutes below ( Review comments provided
by Koushik Myself)
==
Introduction :
Works only on isolated.
Remove: connection timeout, TCP intercept:
Use case: they are not use cases.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/13682/
---
Review request for cloudstack and Prasanna Santhanam.
Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-2247
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/13644/#review25342
---
Commit 9ed5083f9bd9eb668ea152635c98e1598c38f7c2 in branch
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/13644/#review25343
---
Commit ed745d3489340eb0394264a379a22a10c76092b9 in branch
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/13644/#review25345
---
Commit a9e45bf7766728c8439fcc0e3a1a6e3af074b2b7 in branch
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/13644/#review25346
---
Ship it!
Applied with additional asserts
- Prasanna Santhanam
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/13644/#review25344
---
Commit a82f66e0fa8c9e20b0468aae82871c46a9f8b67e in branch
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/13642/#review25347
---
Ship it!
- Prasanna Santhanam
On Aug. 19, 2013, 12:55 p.m.,
Congrats :)
On 20/08/13 4:26 AM, Marcus Sorensen shadow...@gmail.com wrote:
The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack
has asked Toshiaki Hatano to become a committer and we are pleased
to announce that he has accepted.
Being a committer enables easier contribution to the
I started a fresh clean install this morning and am unable to start the
management server:
Error [c.c.u.c.ComponentContext] (Timer-3:null) System integrity check failed.
Refuse to startup
com.cloud.utils.exception.CloudRuntimeException: Database version 4.3.0 is
higher than management software
Congrats Toshiaki!
On 20-Aug-2013, at 4:26 AM, Marcus Sorensen
shadow...@gmail.commailto:shadow...@gmail.com wrote:
Toshiaki
On Aug 9, 2013, at 7:21 PM, Pedro Roque Marques pedro.r.marq...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Aug 2, 2013, at 2:42 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 10:43 PM, Donal Lafferty
donal.laffe...@citrix.comwrote:
I needed a different configuration than DevCloud provided, so I turned to
What branch?
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:48 AM, SuichII, Christopher
chris.su...@netapp.com wrote:
I started a fresh clean install this morning and am unable to start the
management server:
Error [c.c.u.c.ComponentContext] (Timer-3:null) System integrity check
failed. Refuse to startup
Master.
Then, after commenting out the offending code, rebuilding, redeploying the db
and rerunning, this exception is thrown when attempting to start the MS:
ERROR [o.s.w.c.ContextLoader] (main:null) Context initialization failed
org.springframework.beans.factory.BeanCreationException: Error
I would suggest playing around with 4.2 branch, should be much more stable
On 20/08/13 7:18 PM, SuichII, Christopher chris.su...@netapp.com wrote:
Master.
Then, after commenting out the offending code, rebuilding, redeploying
the db and rerunning, this exception is thrown when attempting to
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:19:28PM +, Chiradeep Vittal wrote:
I think developers will anyway try to optimize their build time.
This cannot be helped.
The danger of course is that they 'git push' before running the full build.
Agreed, but I'd at least like to ensure that the full build
I've made some contributions to the UI which are only on master. I could cherry
pick them into 4.2 locally, but I'd like to avoid doing that.
On Aug 20, 2013, at 9:50 AM, Nitin Mehta nitin.me...@citrix.com wrote:
I would suggest playing around with 4.2 branch, should be much more stable
On
Congratulations!
On 20-Aug-2013, at 1:06 PM, Hugo Trippaers htrippa...@schubergphilis.com
wrote:
Congratulations :-)
Sent from my iPhone
On 20 aug. 2013, at 02:55, Go Chiba go.ch...@gmail.com wrote:
Congrats Hatano-san!
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 7:56 AM, Marcus Sorensen
Unless you are fixing a defect for 4.2 please refrain from checking new code in
to 4.2 at this time. RC is supposed to be cut yesterday and will be done in any
minute. Any new code would introduce stability issues.
Appreciate all of your understanding at this time.
Thanks
/Sudha
Sorry for not being clear, I have no intentions of checking any code in to 4.2.
I was simply saying that the only way for me to really work against the 4.2
branch would be to pull in my UI changes locally. Either way, that would not be
ideal for me - I would like to be working against master.
H,
Is someone working on LibvirtComputingResource.createVMFromSpec()? It
is tested in two of the failing tests.
regards,
Daan
What's your HEAD? I'm on 3a29c734475184cf28135acaca271fea1c90554a and
don't see a problm starting up the server. I haven't configured my
zones/pods etc. Also I started with a fresh DB.
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 01:47:50PM +, SuichII, Christopher wrote:
Master.
Then, after commenting out the
On 08/20/2013 04:34 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
H,
Is someone working on LibvirtComputingResource.createVMFromSpec()? It
is tested in two of the failing tests.
Not actively. I created a test a while ago due to a compat issue between
4.0 and 4.1, but that test seems to break now.
When I
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 04:34:46PM +0200, Daan Hoogland wrote:
H,
Is someone working on LibvirtComputingResource.createVMFromSpec()? It
is tested in two of the failing tests.
Don't wait for anyone. There'll be plenty of opportunity to send in
little patches esp. for master :)
This one
I was on cc18ca79fc6d58fb639ffbb455791caeb021589a and tried rolling back to a
commit I have been able to deploy with before
(b727001f483012012c061e8c352c1ebfe7d3fecd) and got the same result.
On Aug 20, 2013, at 10:43 AM, Prasanna Santhanam t...@apache.org wrote:
What's your HEAD? I'm on
Thanks, Marcus, Dave, Chiba-san, Hugo, Sebastian, Nitin, Koushik, Jaypal! :)
--
Toshiaki
-Original Message-
From: Jayapal Reddy Uradi [mailto:jayapalreddy.ur...@citrix.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 08:03
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] New Committer: Toshiaki
Hi,
On 08/20/2013 06:43 PM, Paul Angus wrote:
Hi Guys,
I’m unable to deploy system VMs on KVM using 4.2 anymore
libvirtd.log contains:
2013-08-20 15:17:03.996+: 3299: warning : qemuSetupCgroup:395 :
Could not autoset a RSS limit for domain s-13-VM
2013-08-20 15:17:04.092+: 3299:
Things in open source generally tend to move a good deal faster, and
ideally we avoid the entire waterfall experience.
IMO, (and I am not doing the work so take it for what its worth) I've
looked at the blockers, and they largely don't seem blocker-worthy.
I'd personally cut an RC. If nothing
Hi Guys,
I'm unable to deploy system VMs on KVM using 4.2 anymore
libvirtd.log contains:
2013-08-20 15:17:03.996+: 3299: warning : qemuSetupCgroup:395 : Could not
autoset a RSS limit for domain s-13-VM
2013-08-20 15:17:04.092+: 3299: warning : qemuDomainObjTaint:1377 : Domain
id=1
On the rapid influx of fixes, I don't think that we should tell people to stop
pushing fixes into 4.2, but we also want to minimize churn.
Animesh and I were discussing this in person yesterday and I wonder if we
should branch 4.2 temporarily (perhaps call it 4.2-forward) stabilize the 4.2
When you say anymore, it sounds like you were previously using 4.2
without issues, is that correct, or is this a fresh upgrade. If it's
fresh, note that 4.2 requires a new system vm image (this will be a
part of the upgrade instructions when it's released).
As Wido mentions, patch disk is no
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Alex Huang alex.hu...@citrix.com wrote:
On the rapid influx of fixes, I don't think that we should tell people to
stop
pushing fixes into 4.2, but we also want to minimize churn.
Animesh and I were discussing this in person yesterday and I wonder if we
Sounds good to me.
While devs will always optimize their build, I hope everybody does at least a
full build once before committing.
Cheers,
Hugo
Sent from my iPhone
On 20 aug. 2013, at 15:54, Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:19:28PM +, Chiradeep
-Original Message-
From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us]
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 10:11 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: CloudStack 4.2 Quality Question
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Alex Huang alex.hu...@citrix.com
wrote:
On the rapid influx of
LGTM
On 8/20/13 6:54 AM, Chip Childers chip.child...@sungard.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 10:19:28PM +, Chiradeep Vittal wrote:
I think developers will anyway try to optimize their build time.
This cannot be helped.
The danger of course is that they 'git push' before running the
According to http://s.apache.org/aU6 , the script is available at
http://cloudstack.org/dl/cloud-set-guest-password
But that link 301 redirects to
http://cloudstack.orgdl/cloud-set-guest-password
Note the missing slash and the resulting failure.
I am getting the following results:
http://cloudstack.org/dl/cloud-set-guest-password
http://cloudstack.apache.orgdl/cloud-set-guest-password
Even when this is resolved,
http://cloudstack.apache.org/dl/cloud-set-guest-password results in a 404.
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:02 PM, Chiradeep Vittal
The docs for 4.2 are not settled yet and may take another couple of days. David
are you considering the change for 4.2?
-Original Message-
From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 07, 2013 12:11 AM
To: dev
Subject: Re: Breaking docs out
ok,
-Original Message-
From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 20, 2013 10:52 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: CloudStack 4.2 Quality Question
-Original Message-
From: David Nalley [mailto:da...@gnsa.us]
I'm not sure where the official 4.2 one is, but these should work:
http://jenkins.cloudstack.org/view/master/job/build-systemvm-master/
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Paul Angus paul.an...@shapeblue.com wrote:
The problem may be that I'm still using the older system VM templates, what
are
Please re-check to see that the review comments are incorporated correctly.
Diff:
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;h=3905381
Bug:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-816
Regards,
Jessica T.
On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Jessica Tomechak
All,
In capturing my thoughts on storage, my thinking backed into the driver model.
While we have the beginnings of such a model today, I see the following
deficiencies:
Multiple Models: The Storage, Hypervisor, and Security layers each have a
slightly different model for allowing system
I'm on 61c5b4bf7520080d88ae5a9aad38dee7e0348fa2 and got same error.
I've wiped and redeployed DB by using 'cloud-setup-database' command,
then I confirmed there're no 'default_value' column in table 'configuration'.
The column should be created by schema-420to430.sql.
So, for some reason, the
Hey John,
I think this is some great stuff. Thanks for the write up.
It looks like you have ideas around what might go into a first release of
this plug-in framework. Were you thinking we'd have enough time to squeeze
that first rev into 4.3. I'm just wondering (it's not a huge deal to hit
that
Mike,
Before we can dig into timelines or implementations, I think we need to get
consensus on the problem to solved and the goals. Once we have a proper
understanding of the scope, I believe we can chunk the across a set of
development lifecycle. The subject is vast, but it also has a far
I agree, John - let's get consensus first, then talk time tables.
On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 4:31 PM, John Burwell jburw...@basho.com wrote:
Mike,
Before we can dig into timelines or implementations, I think we need to
get consensus on the problem to solved and the goals. Once we have a
It looks chicken and egg situation.
Bean injection requires 4.3 upgraded database.
DB upgrade process executed by DatabaseUpgradeChecker runs after bean injection.
At least I found a workaround, upgrade DB by hand like below.
$ cloudstack-setup-databases cloud:cloud@localhost --deploy-as root
Hi,
Documentation on sending administrator alerts to external SNMP or Syslog
managers is ready for review. You can view the updated text at the link
below. This is checked in to both master and 4.2 branch.
Please provide your feedback.
Diff:
Still can't get DevCloud2 to work with 4.2 (updated 4.2 again today).
Anyone else seeing this?
I can get a CS env up and running if I create a zone manually.
Thanks
On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 1:16 PM, Mike Tutkowski
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
I've been trying to get
I know this isn't terribly useful, but I've been drawing a lot of squares and
circles and lines that connect those squares and circles lately and I have a
lot of architectural ideas for CloudStack. At the rate I'm going it will take
me about two weeks to put together a discussion/proposal for
Darren,
Actually, loading and unloading aren't difficult if resource management and
drivers work within the following constraints/assumptions:
Drivers are transient and stateless
A driver instance is assigned per resource managed (i.e. no singletons)
A lightweight thread and mailbox (i.e. actor
Sure, I fully understand how it theoretically works, but I'm saying from a
practical perspective it always seems to fall apart. What your describing is
done excellently in OSGI 4.2 Blueprint. It's a beautiful framework that allows
you to expose services that can be dynamically updated at
61 matches
Mail list logo
