Github user mike-tutkowski commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-151273466
Hi Remi,
I have rebuilt my entire 4.6 CS environment from scratch and re-run my
tests.
I'm happy to report that I no longer see the
Github user karuturi commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150898083
copy-pasting mike's response from email (
http://markmail.org/message/bptis5kitr2chqcn ). looks like its still not
working for him with vmware-managed storage
Github user karuturi commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150897664
I was concerned the code change is against the initial design and we may be
doing it without understanding all the implications. But, since we dont have
any better
Managed VMware storage == solidfire?
I believe there is a solid fire specific PR as well that we could merge to
solve all cases.
Is this correct Mike?
Sent from my iPhone
> On 25 Oct 2015, at 08:09, karuturi wrote:
>
> Github user karuturi commented on the pull
FYI that CloudByte also uses managed storage.
On Sunday, October 25, 2015, Mike Tutkowski
wrote:
> Correct, this is still not working for me on VMware with managed storage.
>
> I'm not at home at the moment, but I plan on rebuilding my environment
> from scratch
Correct, this is still not working for me on VMware with managed storage.
I'm not at home at the moment, but I plan on rebuilding my environment from
scratch and trying this again with the latest code as soon as I can.
On Sunday, October 25, 2015, karuturi wrote:
> Github
Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-151028340
OK @mike-tutkowski thanks! I'll merge this now so you can build it from
master. Please let us know if you still have issues, as I'd love to resolve
those as
Let me re-build my entire CS environment from scratch tomorrow and confirm
the problem exists still.
Get back to you soon,
Mike
On Sunday, October 25, 2015, remibergsma wrote:
> Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:
>
>
Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-151028024
Just talked to @karuturi and we think we should merge this now and look
into the remaining VMware issue (as reported bu @mike-tutkowski) as a separate
issue.
Github user asfgit closed the pull request at:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is
Github user mike-tutkowski commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-151029210
Once I re-build my CS env in the morning, I'll run through a bunch of tests
in the morning and afternoon and get back to you.
On Sunday, October
Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150832830
LGTM, based on a set of tests that I run on this branch (on a KVM cluster):
```
nosetests --with-marvin --marvin-config=${marvinCfg} -s -a
Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150783950
FYI: Had been running tests but now that the PR changed I restarted. Will
report results when done, probably somewhere during the weekend.
---
If your project
Github user snuf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150652979
@remibergsma not for the HypervisorGuru, as they are really specific, It
does however conflict with the original idea behind the Gurus if I'm not
mistaken, as a Guru
Github user borisroman commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150657287
@snuf @remibergsma I like this idea. I actually think we should have this
kind behavior everywhere...
Here's another example of non-deterministic
Github user jburwell commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150660824
This seems like a pragmatic fix for 4.6. In the long term, I am concerns
that the method provides an inaccurate view of system state. When no answer is
found, it
Github user borisroman commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150661801
@jburwell I think it should be 2 commits... They fix 2 different things.
The first fixes the Guru issue, while the second one makes it possible to
create
Github user jburwell commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150665355
@borisroman it fixes one ticket -- it should be one commit. In the grand
scheme of the master log, the distinction is not valuable -- it only obfuscates
the
Github user NuxRo commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150545386
I can confirm Wei's modifications fixes my problem.
Both operations (create tmpl and create vol from snapshot) succeed with
RPMs built from
Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150637364
@NuxRo Thanks! I'll count it as a LGTY? :-)
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If
Github user snuf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150642505
@NuxRo @remi it works like a charm and also prevents little accidents from
happening. The interesting thing is that the XenserverGuru.java contains the
exact same code
Github user NuxRo commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150638003
Count it, but @karuturi gave me the impression she was going for a
different kind of fix, on the ovm3 side of things, might want to check with her.
---
If your
Github user snuf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150647256
@Nuxro @remibergsma @karuturi by adding a simple log line to the
XenServerGuru.java you get the following when doing a snap to vol and a snap to
temp:
'2015-10-23
Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150639519
@NuxRo I agree, I want a solution that you, @snuf and @karuturi agree on :-)
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user ustcweizhou commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150671146
@borisroman yes, you are right. Should I seperate this PR to two ?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user ustcweizhou commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150676794
@borisroman done. #954 and #976
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project
Github user borisroman commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150672117
@ustcweizhou You may do so! Then also separate the ticket.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150651411
@snuf, if I understand correctly this PR only calls the Guru of whatever
hypervisor you use, and doesn't call the others. I can remember a certain
outage that
Github user NuxRo commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-149896726
Wei,
These operations are done on a snapshot of a ROOT volume that does not
exist any more.
That VM has long been deleted, but the snapshot is OK, on
Github user NuxRo commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-149905640
So to clarify:
FAIL - create volume from snapshot whose original volume has been deleted
PASS - create volume from snapshot whose original volume has not
Github user snuf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-149995084
karuturi yep you're right! looking at the code something went wrong with
lifting it over.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150040130
Ran 40 tests in 7009.763s
FAILED (errors=3)
these are the lb tests that have been failing constantly.
as for the load balance tests:
Github user snuf commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-150064890
@karuturi @NuxRo @ustcweizhou could you please check
[#962](https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/962) for the details as #954
could then be closed and #962 could
Github user NuxRo commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-149887192
I used ovm3 initially and now I tried with ovm3guru, no luck, both
operations fail (create volume, create template).
---
If your project is set up for it, you can
Github user karuturi commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-149889343
@NuxRo This is the exact value I used and which worked for me "Ovm3Guru"
Just a check, did you restart the Management Server after changing the
config?
---
Github user NuxRo commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-149890722
Ovm3Guru made a difference! I could create a template from the snapshot,
however not a volume.
Here's the error I got when trying to create a volume:
Github user ustcweizhou commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-149891610
@NuxRo Can you check if the original volume is removed ? This is what my
second commit wants to fix.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to
Github user NuxRo commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-149876303
BTW excluding ovm3 in hypervisor.gurus.exclude doesn't fix anything for me.
The problem remains.
I'll re-build with Wei's patches and test.
---
If your project
Github user karuturi commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-149880562
Which why I think the fix should be in ovm3hypervisorguru
-Original Message-
From: "ustcweizhou"
Sent:
Github user karuturi commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-149880641
What value did you give? It should be ovm3guru
-Original Message-
From: "NuxRo"
Sent: â21-â10-â15 17:51
Github user karuturi commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-149859553
after excluding ovm3 hypervisor using the "hypervisor.gurus.exclude" global
setting, template creation from snapshot on kvm is successful.
I dont think we
Github user ustcweizhou commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-149868534
@karuturi what you did is a workaround for KVM.
The request on KVM should not be processed by ovm3hypervisorguru, but
KvmHypervisorGuru.
---
If your
Github user ustcweizhou commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-149793103
Daan, I just edited the commit message to describe the issue.
This two issue looks small, but the functions are called by many other
functions. hence it may
Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954#issuecomment-149469471
Wei, this code looks sensible but can you ad a small explenation as it is
actually two small fixes. It is one a the test in a bunch PRs to me.
The jenkins
GitHub user ustcweizhou opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/954
CLOUDSTACK-8964: Can't create template or volume from snapshot on KVM
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull
45 matches
Mail list logo