Yes, I am able to explain. I am still not getting the whole picture here.
VR = virtual router
First condition:
> if (dest.getCluster() != null) {
>
- If we are forcing a VR to a specific cluster, normally this happens
when we are starting a router that was already deployed. If it is a new VR
“dest.getCluster()” will return null( I think this is your case).
- Then, we go for the “else” part of the code. In this block, we check
if there is a default hypervisor configured,
“_resourceMgr.getDefaultHypervisor”.
- If there is not a default hypervisor, we load
“_resourceMgr.getSupportedHypervisorTypes” all supported hypervisor in the
given zone. And this will be the value of “hypervisors”.
- After all that, at the method
“com.cloud.network.router.NetworkHelperImpl.deployRouter(RouterDeploymentDefinition,
boolean)”, we get the first hypervisor available and try to deploy a router
in on of the available hosts for this hypervisor type.
Was that clear for you?
On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Engelmann Florian <
florian.engelm...@everyware.ch> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> after digging into the source code I wonder if
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/master/server/
> src/com/cloud/network/router/NetworkHelperImpl.java
>
> line 453
> final List<HypervisorType> hypervisors = getHypervisors(
> routerDeploymentDefinition);
>
> line 458
> for (final Iterator<HypervisorType> iter = hypervisors.iterator();
> iter.hasNext();) {
>
> ever gets more than one item in the list? In our case it looks like there
> is only one item in this list (KVM) even if we got three clusters - one
> with KVM and two with Xenserver and the VM gets deployed on Xenserver.
>
> Are you able to explain the following function to me?
>
> protected List<HypervisorType> getHypervisors(final
> RouterDeploymentDefinition routerDeploymentDefinition) throws
> InsufficientServerCapacityException {
> final DeployDestination dest = routerDeploymentDefinition.
> getDest();
> List<HypervisorType> hypervisors = new ArrayList<HypervisorType>();
> if (dest.getCluster() != null) {
> if (dest.getCluster().getHypervisorType() ==
> HypervisorType.Ovm) {
> hypervisors.add(getClusterToStartDomainRouterF
> orOvm(dest.getCluster().getPodId()));
> } else {
> hypervisors.add(dest.getCluster().getHypervisorType());
> }
> } else {
> final HypervisorType defaults = _resourceMgr.
> getDefaultHypervisor(dest.getDataCenter().getId());
> if (defaults != HypervisorType.None) {
> hypervisors.add(defaults);
> } else {
> // if there is no default hypervisor, get it from the
> cluster
> hypervisors =
> _resourceMgr.getSupportedHypervisorTypes(dest.getDataCenter().getId(),
> true, routerDeploymentDefinition.getPlan().getPodId());
> }
> }
>
> How will that function return a list?
>
> All the best,
> Florian
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Engelmann Florian <florian.engelm...@everyware.ch>
> Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 12:24 PM
> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Ubuntu 16.04, Openvswitch networking issue
>
> Hi,
>
> this behavior was caused by the following setting:
>
> system.vm.default.hypervisor = Xenserver
>
> After setting this global parameter to NULL we are able to deploy
> SystemVMs (virtual router) on KVM.
>
> Sad to say, we are no more able to deploy SystemVMs on Xenserver since we
> changed the parameter?!?!
>
> Allocating the VR with id=4213 in datacenter com.cloud.dc.DataCenterVO$$
> EnhancerByCGLIB$$6fda4e4f@2 with the hypervisor type KVM
> [...]
> VM state transitted from :Starting to Stopped with event:
> OperationFailedvm's original host id: null new host id: null host id before
> state transition: null
>
>
> Is anybody able to point me in the direction where to find the logic (on
> Github) behind how ACS decides which Hypervisor should be used to deploy a
> VirtualRouter SystemVM? Why is KVM chosen?
>
> All the best,
> Florian
>
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Engelmann Florian
> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2017 5:25 PM
> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Ubuntu 16.04, Openvswitch networking issue
>
> Hi Rafael,
>
> We do use the following setup (Test environment currently):
>
> ACS 4.9.2
> 1x Xenserver 6.5 Cluster (3 nodes)
> 1x Xenserver 7.0 Cluster (1 node)
> 1x Ubuntu 16.04 KVM Cluster (3 nodes)
>
> Networking = Advanced Zone VPC and Virtual Router
>
> I noticed the error Message was just informational an not the real
> problem. The problem we got is:
>
> [...]
> Allocating the VR with id=4185 in datacenter com.cloud.dc.DataCenterVO$$
> EnhancerByCGLIB$$caa6c375@2 with the hypervisor type XenServer
> [...]
> Cluster: 6 has HyperVisorType that does not match the VM, skipping this
> cluster
> [...]
>
> We tried to force ACS to use the KVM systemVM template but for some reason
> ACS refuses to use that System offering.
>
> Hosts:
> Name ewcstack-vh023-test
> Host Tags="kvm"
>
> Primary storage:
> Name: ewcstack-vh023-test,Local Storage: Storage Tags="vol-local-kvm"
>
> System offering:
> Name custom-local-sm-kvm
> Storage Tags="vol-local-kvm"
> Host Tags="kvm"
>
> Network offering:
> Name custom local kvm
> System offering="custom-local-sm-kvm"
>
> Disk offering:
> Name custom local kvm
> Storage Tags="vol-local-kvm"
>
>
> Creating a Instance with a network offering "custom-local-sm-kvm" doesn't
> stop ACS from using a XenServer systemVM template. Why?
>
> All the best,
> Florian
>
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Rafael Weingärtner <rafaelweingart...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 4:08 PM
> To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Ubuntu 16.04, Openvswitch networking issue
>
> I think we may need more information. ACS version, network deployment type,
> and hypervisors?
>
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:02 AM, Engelmann Florian <
> florian.engelm...@everyware.ch> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > sorry I ment "I am NOT able to solve"....
> >
> > ________________________________________
> > From: Engelmann Florian <florian.engelm...@everyware.ch>
> > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 3:36 PM
> > To: users@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Subject: Ubuntu 16.04, Openvswitch networking issue
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > another error I am able to solve:
> >
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,097 DEBUG [c.c.a.ApiServlet] (catalina-exec-26:ctx-
> > 30020483) (logid:d303f8ef) ===START=== 192.168.252.76 -- GET
> > command=createNetwork&response=json&zoneId=e683eeaa-
> > 92c9-4651-91b9-165939f9000c&name=net-kvm008&displayText=
> > net-kvm008&networkOf
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,135 DEBUG [c.c.n.g.BigSwitchBcfGuestNetworkGuru]
> > (catalina-exec-26:ctx-30020483 ctx-430b6ae1) (logid:d303f8ef) Refusing to
> > design this network, the physical isolation type is not BCF_SEGMENT
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,136 DEBUG [o.a.c.n.c.m.ContrailGuru]
> > (catalina-exec-26:ctx-30020483 ctx-430b6ae1) (logid:d303f8ef) Refusing to
> > design this network
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,137 DEBUG [c.c.a.m.DirectAgentAttache]
> > (DirectAgent-144:ctx-b2cdad73) (logid:eb129204) Seq
> > 179-6955246674520311671: Response Received:
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,137 DEBUG [c.c.a.t.Request] (StatsCollector-5:ctx-
> 4298a591)
> > (logid:eb129204) Seq 179-6955246674520311671: Received: { Ans: , MgmtId:
> > 345049101620, via: 179(ewcstack-vh003-test), Ver: v1, Flags: 10, {
> > GetStorageStatsAnswer } }
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,137 DEBUG [c.c.n.g.MidoNetGuestNetworkGuru]
> > (catalina-exec-26:ctx-30020483 ctx-430b6ae1) (logid:d303f8ef) design
> called
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,138 DEBUG [c.c.h.o.r.Ovm3HypervisorGuru]
> > (StatsCollector-5:ctx-4298a591) (logid:eb129204)
> > getCommandHostDelegation: class com.cloud.agent.api.
> GetStorageStatsCommand
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,138 DEBUG [c.c.h.XenServerGuru]
> (StatsCollector-5:ctx-4298a591)
> > (logid:eb129204) getCommandHostDelegation: class com.cloud.agent.api.
> > GetStorageStatsCommand
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,139 DEBUG [c.c.n.g.MidoNetGuestNetworkGuru]
> > (catalina-exec-26:ctx-30020483 ctx-430b6ae1) (logid:d303f8ef) Refusing to
> > design this network, the physical isolation type is not MIDO
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,139 DEBUG [c.c.a.m.DirectAgentAttache]
> > (DirectAgent-72:ctx-656a03ae) (logid:dd7ada9e) Seq
> 217-8596245788743434945:
> > Executing request
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,141 DEBUG [c.c.n.g.NiciraNvpGuestNetworkGuru]
> > (catalina-exec-26:ctx-30020483 ctx-430b6ae1) (logid:d303f8ef) Refusing to
> > design this network
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,142 DEBUG [o.a.c.n.o.OpendaylightGuestNetworkGuru]
> > (catalina-exec-26:ctx-30020483 ctx-430b6ae1) (logid:d303f8ef) Refusing to
> > design this network
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,144 DEBUG [c.c.n.g.OvsGuestNetworkGuru]
> > (catalina-exec-26:ctx-30020483 ctx-430b6ae1) (logid:d303f8ef) Refusing to
> > design this network
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,163 DEBUG [o.a.c.n.g.SspGuestNetworkGuru]
> > (catalina-exec-26:ctx-30020483 ctx-430b6ae1) (logid:d303f8ef) SSP not
> > configured to be active
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,164 DEBUG [c.c.n.g.BrocadeVcsGuestNetworkGuru]
> > (catalina-exec-26:ctx-30020483 ctx-430b6ae1) (logid:d303f8ef) Refusing to
> > design this network
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,165 DEBUG [c.c.n.g.NuageVspGuestNetworkGuru]
> > (catalina-exec-26:ctx-30020483 ctx-430b6ae1) (logid:d303f8ef) Refusing to
> > design network using network offering 54 on physical network 200
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,166 DEBUG [o.a.c.e.o.NetworkOrchestrator]
> > (catalina-exec-26:ctx-30020483 ctx-430b6ae1) (logid:d303f8ef) Releasing
> > lock for Acct[3426fb73-70ad-47d9-9c5d-355f34891438-fen]
> > 2017-02-17 15:24:36,188 DEBUG [c.c.a.ApiServlet]
> > (catalina-exec-26:ctx-30020483 ctx-430b6ae1) (logid:d303f8ef) ===END===
> > 192.168.252.76 -- GET command=createNetwork&
> > response=json&zoneId=e683eeaa-92c9-4651-91b9-165939f9000c&
> > name=net-kvm008&displayText=net-kvm00
> >
> >
> > We do not use BigSwitch or anything like this, just plain Openvswitch
> with
> > Ubuntu 16.04. Any idea whats going on?
> >
> > All the best,
> > Florian
> >
> > EveryWare AG
> > Florian Engelmann
> > Systems Engineer
> > Zurlindenstrasse 52a
> > CH-8003 Zürich
> >
> > T +41 44 466 60 00
> > F +41 44 466 60 10
> >
> > florian.engelm...@everyware.ch
> > www.everyware.ch
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Rafael Weingärtner
>
--
Rafael Weingärtner
