On 5/21/2019 11:14 PM, Rene Moser wrote:
Just a suspicion: have you checked, the system VMs actually have
allocated 512 MB RAM? I remember the systemvm templates had the setting
to only use 256 MB RAM in previous versions which is too low. IMHO this
setting must be adjusted manually in the data
Just a suspicion: have you checked, the system VMs actually have
allocated 512 MB RAM? I remember the systemvm templates had the setting
to only use 256 MB RAM in previous versions which is too low. IMHO this
setting must be adjusted manually in the database before the upgrade
(you can do it while
Hello Eric,
If the router version is displayed as UNKNOWN in the portal, it would be
a connectivity issue. Check your connections related to firewall rules
between the ACP management hosts, hypervisor and VR. Is your VR management
network setup correctly?
With regards
Thomas
On Wed, 22 May
Hi, all:
I am creating a new CloudStack 4.11.2.0 instance with VMware hypervisors. I
have some general questions regarding such a set up:
My first attempt had some errors, so I decided to blow away the CloudStack
database and start from scratch again. Now when I try to add VMware datacenter
Thanks for the response, sorry if I sound frustrated, but this is
supposed to be a simple easy process and it's been horrible all the way
through. 4.11.1 failed so I had to downgrade back to 4.9, and now 4.11.2
has failed to upgrade too. I've thus far spent around 16 hours of my
time on what sh
Hi Eric,
Can you describe your environment in detail such as management server host
distro, hypervisor version, current CloudStack version, did you register the
4.11.2 systemvmtemplate beforw upgrading etc.
Regards.
Regards,
Rohit Yadav
From: Eric Lee Green
S
You may remember me as the person who had to roll back to Cloudstack
4.9.x because Cloudstack 4.11.1 wouldn't start any virtual machines once
I upgraded to it, claiming that there were inadequate resources even
though I had over 150 gigabytes of memory free in my cluster and oodles
of CPU free
+1
+1
Erik
tir. 21. mai 2019 kl. 11:40 skrev Rohit Yadav :
> All,
>
>
> Thank you for your feedback and discussions. From what we've discussed so
> far, we've lazy consensus that nobody wants to use el6 or are limited to
> upgrade to el7/el8 due to potential risks.
>
>
> Moving forward I put forth
+1 (Binding)
paul.an...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
Amadeus House, Floral Street, London WC2E 9DPUK
@shapeblue
-Original Message-
From: Anurag Awasthi
Sent: 21 May 2019 10:55
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org; dev
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Remove el6 support in future CloudStack ve
+1
From: Dag Sonstebo
Sent: Tuesday, May 21, 2019 3:22 PM
To: users@cloudstack.apache.org; dev
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Remove el6 support in future CloudStack versions (was Re:
[DISCUSS] Remove support for el6 packaging in 4.13/4.14)
+1
Regards,
Dag Sonstebo
Cloud
+1
Regards,
Dag Sonstebo
Cloud Architect
ShapeBlue
On 21/05/2019, 10:40, "Rohit Yadav" wrote:
All,
Thank you for your feedback and discussions. From what we've discussed so
far, we've lazy consensus that nobody wants to use el6 or are limited to
upgrade to el7/el8 due to
All,
Thank you for your feedback and discussions. From what we've discussed so far,
we've lazy consensus that nobody wants to use el6 or are limited to upgrade to
el7/el8 due to potential risks.
Moving forward I put forth the following for voting:
- Next minor/major releases (such as 4.11.3
13 matches
Mail list logo
