Re: vcloud: metadata injection via ssh vs via guest customisation script

Hi Michel, Could you try with the proposed change and try again. On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 12:22 PM, Isuru Perera wrote: > Hi Udara, > > As you mentioned, we should be using the API for the customization script. > > I missed this API when implementing the support for passing payload. > > Shall we

Re: vcloud: metadata injection via ssh vs via guest customisation script

Hi Udara, As you mentioned, we should be using the API for the customization script. I missed this API when implementing the support for passing payload. Shall we change the code and test? Michiel, As I know, from the beginning, we have been passing the payload from a script. As Udara found out

Re: vcloud: metadata injection via ssh vs via guest customisation script

Hi Isuru, Nirmal, I have have doubt whether we are really using the customization script. Currently code call the runScript() as below. template.getOptions().runScript(customizationScript); Aren't we executing as a script as Michel mentioned ? Isn't below is the correct way of doing? templ

Re: Reduce the Verbosity of Logging

+1. We need change such redundant log messages to "DEBUG" level and keep only the required logs in "INFO" level. On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 11:33 PM, Isuru Haththotuwa wrote: > Hi Devs, > > I think we need to $subject, specially in the messaging component. In > single JVM, since we have only one Top

Re: Requesting edit permission for Stratos Wiki.

Access granted! Regards, Mariangela *--* Mariangela Hills Senior Technical Writer *WSO2, Inc.*lean.enterprise.middleware. m: +94 773 500185 w: http://wso2.com On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Vishanth Balasubramaniam wrote: > Hi Mariangela, > > This is to request f

Re: Reduce the Verbosity of Logging

+1 However when reducing log entries IMO it should be taken in to consideration if the particular log entries are actually redundant or if they are representing unique code paths, which can help in initial "debugging" itself. Regards, Chamila de Alwis Software Engineer | WSO2 | +94772207163 Blog

Re: Reduce the Verbosity of Logging

+1 On Sunday, November 9, 2014, Isuru Haththotuwa wrote: > Hi Devs, > > I think we need to $subject, specially in the messaging component. In > single JVM, since we have only one Topology model, and three sets of > updaters, there are multiple logs indicating that Topology has already been > upd

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

Hi all, Please note that Nirmal has updated kubernetes binaries to latest version in master branch. Please use vagrant scripts at [1] if you are going to test kubernetes scenario on master branch. Earlier one might not work. 1. https://github.com/nirmal070125/vagrant-kubernetes-setup/archive/v2.

Re: Reduce the Verbosity of Logging

+1 Isuru. Touched, not typed. Erroneous words are a feature, not a typo. On Nov 10, 2014 1:24 AM, "Nirmal Fernando" wrote: > +1 from me too. > > On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Isuru Haththotuwa > wrote: > >> Hi Devs, >> >> I think we need to $subject, specially in the messaging component. In

Re: vcloud: metadata injection via ssh vs via guest customisation script

Hi, Yes metadata is passed via guest customization script from Stratos side. However Jclouds execute the customization script using ssh. Please refer to setDynamicPayload() of [1] for implementation [1] https://github.com/apache/stratos/blob/master/components/org.apache.stratos.cloud.controller/

vcloud: metadata injection via ssh vs via guest customisation script

Hi people, First of all, I’m not sure if this is a Stratos or a jclouds issue, I haven’t been able to nail down the area of the code to be absolutely sure. It looks like on vCloud, Stratos/jclouds “injects" the metadata by ssh-ing into freshly spun up cartridges, using the root username and the

Re: Reduce the Verbosity of Logging

+1 from me too. On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 7:03 PM, Isuru Haththotuwa wrote: > Hi Devs, > > I think we need to $subject, specially in the messaging component. In > single JVM, since we have only one Topology model, and three sets of > updaters, there are multiple logs indicating that Topology has al

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

Tested undeployment and worked for simple and complex apps. There is an issue in re-deploying the same app, where it did not get re-activated. Will look in to this. On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Chamila De Alwis wrote: > Hi, > > Lasindu and I are still trying to get the Python CA working. The

[GitHub] stratos pull request: Apache cloudstack integration for Stratos

Github user imesh commented on the pull request: https://github.com/apache/stratos/pull/97#issuecomment-62314458 @asankasanjaya We have identified several minor issues, appreciate if you could correct them and re-submit the PR. I also noticed that this PR now conflicts with the latest

[GitHub] stratos pull request: Apache cloudstack integration for Stratos

Github user imesh commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/stratos/pull/97#discussion_r20060557 --- Diff: components/org.apache.stratos.cloud.controller/src/main/java/org/apache/stratos/cloud/controller/iaases/CloudstackIaas.java --- @@ -0,0 +1,539 @@

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

We have now merged all changes from the docker-grouping-merge branch to the master branch. Could not rebase due to the number of conflicts occurred, therefore a merge was done. Master branch now can be used for development. Please do a complete build and run the tests. Thanks On Sun, Nov 9, 2014

[GitHub] stratos pull request: Apache cloudstack integration for Stratos

Github user imesh commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/stratos/pull/97#discussion_r20060547 --- Diff: components/org.apache.stratos.cloud.controller/src/main/java/org/apache/stratos/cloud/controller/iaases/CloudstackIaas.java --- @@ -0,0 +1,539 @@

[GitHub] stratos pull request: Apache cloudstack integration for Stratos

Github user imesh commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/stratos/pull/97#discussion_r20060545 --- Diff: components/org.apache.stratos.cloud.controller/src/main/java/org/apache/stratos/cloud/controller/iaases/CloudstackIaas.java --- @@ -0,0 +1,539 @@

[GitHub] stratos pull request: Apache cloudstack integration for Stratos

Github user imesh commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/stratos/pull/97#discussion_r20060533 --- Diff: components/org.apache.stratos.cloud.controller/src/main/java/org/apache/stratos/cloud/controller/iaases/CloudstackIaas.java --- @@ -0,0 +1,539 @@

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

It seems nearly impossible to rebase changes from docker-grouping-merge branch to the master. The docker-grouping-merge branch is nearly 650 commits ahead of the master and the rebase conflicts almost at each commit. We might need to go ahead with a merge. On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 10:38 PM, Chamila

[GitHub] stratos pull request: Metadataservice Implementation

Github user asfgit closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/stratos/pull/37 --- 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 enab

Re: Reduce the Verbosity of Logging

+1 for doing this..This will help debugging issues specially with composite application, since multiple clusters associated with an application, the flow cannot be predicted using the logs since logs include publisher as well as subscriber for the single JVM. On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 11:33 PM, Isuru

Reduce the Verbosity of Logging

Hi Devs, I think we need to $subject, specially in the messaging component. In single JVM, since we have only one Topology model, and three sets of updaters, there are multiple logs indicating that Topology has already been updated. For an example when a service created, there will be multiple le

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

It turned out it was an accessibility error. The events are now being received by the agent and health stats are published to CEP. The app path for PHP is not being properly set right now, so I'm looking into it now. Regards, Chamila de Alwis Software Engineer | WSO2 | +94772207163 Blog: code.cha

Re: Commit New UI changes to docker-grouping-merge

Hi, Sorry for delayed reply. I still need to verify few things on application deployment. I'll try to send pull request soon. meantime you can check the progress on https://github.com/dakshika/stratos-4.1.0-ui/tree/docker-integration-merge simply create symlink or clone repo to /repository/dep

Re: New grouping commands in CLI

+1 Touched, not typed. Erroneous words are a feature, not a typo. On Nov 9, 2014 9:24 PM, "Isuru Haththotuwa" wrote: > > > On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Manula Chathurika Thantriwatte < > manu...@wso2.com> wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> I have added new grouping commands in CLI. Those commands ar

Re: New grouping commands in CLI

On Sat, Nov 8, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Manula Chathurika Thantriwatte < manu...@wso2.com> wrote: > Hi All, > > I have added new grouping commands in CLI. Those commands are, > > deploy-service-group Deploy service group > deploy-application Deploy application > > undeploy-ser

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Lahiru Sandaruwan wrote: > So this could be the Mqtt issue we saw earlier as well? I'm not sure. It might have been an accessibility issue. I'm in the process of verifying this now. Regards, Chamila de Alwis Software Engineer | WSO2 | +94772207163 Blog: code.ch

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

Please try to hold your commits to both docker-grouping-merge and master branches now. I'm now merging changes from docker-grouping-merge branch to master. I did a quick test with rebase and merge, merge worked without a problem but the rebase failed with conflicts. Will try to resolve conflicts i

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

Will try to do a rebase Nirmal. Lahiru: Yes this could be. Shall we try to login to ActiveMQ dashboard and see whether message broker is receiving those events? Thanks On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 4:46 PM, Lahiru Sandaruwan wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Chamila De Alwis > wrote: > >>

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Chamila De Alwis wrote: > Hi, > > Lasindu and I are still trying to get the Python CA working. The puppet > module is operational. But at the moment the CA is not getting the events > published to the MB. > So this could be the Mqtt issue we saw earlier as well?

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

Please do a rebase instead of merge. On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 12:05 PM, Rajaratnam Rajkumar wrote: > Yes Lahiru, merge now :) > > On Sunday, November 9, 2014, Chamila De Alwis wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Lasindu and I are still trying to get the Python CA working. The puppet >> module is operational. B

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

Yes Lahiru, merge now :) On Sunday, November 9, 2014, Chamila De Alwis wrote: > Hi, > > Lasindu and I are still trying to get the Python CA working. The puppet > module is operational. But at the moment the CA is not getting the events > published to the MB. > > > Regards, > Chamila de Alwis > S

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

Hi, Lasindu and I are still trying to get the Python CA working. The puppet module is operational. But at the moment the CA is not getting the events published to the MB. Regards, Chamila de Alwis Software Engineer | WSO2 | +94772207163 Blog: code.chamiladealwis.com On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 3:3

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

Shall we merge to the master now? On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 3:04 PM, Lahiru Sandaruwan wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Reka Thirunavukkarasu > wrote: > >> Fixed the serviceId getting NULL by setting it to the ClusterContext and >> committed it.. >> > > Fine then :) > >> >> On Sun, Nov

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Reka Thirunavukkarasu wrote: > Fixed the serviceId getting NULL by setting it to the ClusterContext and > committed it.. > Fine then :) > > On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Reka Thirunavukkarasu > wrote: > >> Hi Lahiru, >> >> As you have introduced ClusteContext

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Reka Thirunavukkarasu wrote: > Hi Lahiru, > > As you have introduced ClusteContext in ClusterMonitor, the serviceId got > to removed. Is this done purposely? If so, can we update the getServiceId() > (which referred by several other places) in monitors to return t

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

Fixed the serviceId getting NULL by setting it to the ClusterContext and committed it.. On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Reka Thirunavukkarasu wrote: > Hi Lahiru, > > As you have introduced ClusteContext in ClusterMonitor, the serviceId got > to removed. Is this done purposely? If so, can we upda

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

Hi Lahiru, As you have introduced ClusteContext in ClusterMonitor, the serviceId got to removed. Is this done purposely? If so, can we update the getServiceId() (which referred by several other places) in monitors to return the correct serviceId by reading ClusterContext? Due to this, ClusterMon

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

Hi On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 2:19 PM, Isuru Haththotuwa wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Isuru Haththotuwa > wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Reka Thirunavukkarasu >> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> After fixing few issues, i could get the application undeployment >>> w

Re: [Important] Merging Grouping Changes to Master Branch

On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 1:13 PM, Isuru Haththotuwa wrote: > > > On Sun, Nov 9, 2014 at 1:09 PM, Reka Thirunavukkarasu > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> After fixing few issues, i could get the application undeployment working >> with one cluster now. So the basic undeployment is working fine...Will >>