Done, thanks. http://bugs.cloudstack.org/browse/CS-15551
On Jul 11, 2012, at 6:55 PM, Anthony Xu wrote: > Please file a bug for this, > > Thanks, > Anthony > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Caleb Call [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 5:52 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: Deploying using ISOs >> >> I think the global option would be best (easiest for majority of users). >> Also, the documentation for disabling HVM in the db >> (http://docs.cloudstack.org/Knowledge_Base/How_to_use_CloudStack_withou >> t_Hardware_Virtualization) should be updated as well to atleast mention >> the need to update templates in the db as well if running without HVM >> support. >> >> >> On Jul 11, 2012, at 6:39 PM, Anthony Xu wrote: >> >>> We removed HVM from UI intentionally due to following reasons, >>> 1. most users may not know what's HVM, it is confusing. >>> 2. for vmware, it doesn't care about HVM, it can boot any OS on any >> x86_64 host. >>> 3. for kvm, HVM support is required. >>> So it is hard for user to configure hvm for template/iso. >>> And >>> 4. most of hosts support HVM. >>> >>> >>> Only XenServer cares about HVM, and even for XenServer , HVM is OS >> specific, for example, XenServer only supports PV linux, no HVM linux. >>> Luckily, XenServer will complain if you want to start a HVM on a non- >> HVM host. >>> >>> >>> So I think we can add a global configuration to enable/disable all >> HVM checks in CloudStack >>> >>> >>> Anthony >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Nitin Mehta [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 5:07 PM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: RE: Deploying using ISOs >>>> >>>> Celeb - could you please open a UI bug for this @ >>>> http://bugs.cloudstack.org/secure/Dashboard.jspa ? The UI should >> have >>>> an option to mark/unmark the template/iso hvm while registering it. >> The >>>> api already provides that. >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> -Nitin >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Caleb Call [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 11:37 AM >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: Deploying using ISOs >>>> >>>> Great, thanks, that's exactly what it was. VM started fine this >> time. >>>> >>>> On Jul 11, 2012, at 12:29 PM, Edison Su wrote: >>>> >>>>> Yah, that's the problem. All the templates/ISOs uploaded through UI, >>>> are marked as HVM enabled by default, while your hypervisor doesn't >>>> support HVM, then you can't create VM. >>>>> You can hack the DB, by "update vm_template set hvm=0", then try to >>>> create the VM again. But you need to make sure, your ISO does >> support >>>> PV. >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Caleb Call [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 11:18 AM >>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>> Subject: Re: Deploying using ISOs >>>>>> >>>>>> Guest OS is CentOS, I've tried setting it to CentOS 6 (what it is), >>>>>> CentOS 5.6, and CentOS 5.3 (what the CentOS 5.6 template uses) and >>>> it >>>>>> still does not work. My hypervisor is Xenserver 6 without HVM >>>>>> support (test environment, using older hardware). >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Jul 11, 2012, at 12:13 PM, Edison Su wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> What's the guest os type of your ISO? How about change the guest >> OS >>>>>> type to CentOS 5.6 also? Will it work? >>>>>>> And what's your hypervisor? Does your hypervisor host support HVM? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> From: Caleb Call [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 2:28 AM >>>>>>>> To: [email protected] >>>>>>>> Subject: Deploying using ISOs >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I'm trying to create VMs using ISOs I've uploaded. The ISOs all >>>>>>>> say they are ready to be used and they show up fine during >>>> instance >>>>>>>> creation. However, once I create the instance, I get an error >>>> that >>>>>>>> says "Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|<vm id>]". >>>> Looking >>>>>>>> through the logs, it seems like the way it's determining >> resources >>>>>> is >>>>>>>> different for ISO based and Template based. I can create a VM >>>>>>>> using the included CentOS 5.6 template with the exact same >> compute >>>>>> offering. >>>>>>>> In the logs I get this when creating a VM from a template: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------------- >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,893 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) DeploymentPlanner allocation algorithm: >>>> firstfit >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,893 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) Trying to allocate a host and storage pools >>>> from >>>>>>>> dc:2, pod:null,cluster:null, requested cpu: 500, requested ram: >>>>>>>> 536870912 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,893 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) Is ROOT volume READY (pool already >> allocated)?: >>>>>> No >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,893 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) Searching all possible resources under this >>>> Zone: >>>>>> 2 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,898 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) Listing clusters in order of aggregate >> capacity, >>>>>>>> that have (atleast one host with) enough CPU and RAM capacity >>>> under >>>>>>>> this Zone: 2 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,900 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) CPUOverprovisioningFactor considered: 3.0 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,921 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) Checking resources in Cluster: 3 under Pod: 2 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,922 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) Calling HostAllocators to find suitable hosts >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,922 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator] >>>>>> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Looking for hosts in >>>> dc: >>>>>> 2 >>>>>>>> pod:2 cluster:3 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,928 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator] >>>>>> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) FirstFitAllocator >> has >>>> 2 >>>>>>>> hosts to check for allocation: [Host[-1-Routing], Host[-5- >> Routing]] >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,949 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator] >>>>>> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Found 2 hosts for >>>>>>>> allocation after prioritization: [Host[-5-Routing], >>>>>>>> Host[-1-Routing]] >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,949 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator] >>>>>> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Looking for >>>>>>>> speed=500Mhz, >>>>>>>> Ram=512 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,972 DEBUG >> [cloud.capacity.CapacityManagerImpl] >>>>>>>> (Job-Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Checking if >> host: >>>>>>>> 5 has enough capacity for requested CPU: 500 and requested RAM: >>>>>>>> 536870912 , cpuOverprovisioningFactor >>>>>>>> : 3.0 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,986 DEBUG >> [cloud.capacity.CapacityManagerImpl] >>>>>>>> (Job-Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Hosts's actual >>>>>> total >>>>>>>> CPU: 11172 and CPU after applying overprovisioning: 33516 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,986 DEBUG >> [cloud.capacity.CapacityManagerImpl] >>>>>>>> (Job-Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Free CPU: >> 30516 , >>>>>>>> Requested CPU: 500 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,994 DEBUG >> [cloud.capacity.CapacityManagerImpl] >>>>>>>> (Job-Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Free RAM: >>>>>> 4830291968 , >>>>>>>> Requested RAM: 536870912 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,994 DEBUG >> [cloud.capacity.CapacityManagerImpl] >>>>>>>> (Job-Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Host has enough >>>>>>>> CPU and RAM available >>>>>>>> ------------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> However, using the exact same compute offering, when I try to >>>>>>>> create >>>>>> a >>>>>>>> VM using an ISO, I get the following in the logs: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------------- >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,534 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) DeploymentPlanner allocation algorithm: >>>> firstfit >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,535 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) Trying to allocate a host and storage pools >>>> from >>>>>>>> dc:2, pod:null,cluster:null, requested cpu: 500, requested ram: >>>>>>>> 536870912 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,535 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) Is ROOT volume READY (pool already >> allocated)?: >>>>>> No >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,535 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) Searching all possible resources under this >>>> Zone: >>>>>> 2 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,539 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) Listing clusters in order of aggregate >> capacity, >>>>>>>> that have (atleast one host with) enough CPU and RAM capacity >>>> under >>>>>>>> this Zone: 2 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,541 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) CPUOverprovisioningFactor considered: 3.0 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,558 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) Checking resources in Cluster: 3 under Pod: 2 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,558 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) Calling HostAllocators to find suitable hosts >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,558 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator] >>>>>> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Looking for hosts in >>>> dc: >>>>>> 2 >>>>>>>> pod:2 cluster:3 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,564 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator] >>>>>> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) FirstFitAllocator >> has >>>> 2 >>>>>>>> hosts to check for allocation: [Host[-1-Routing], Host[-5- >> Routing]] >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,567 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator] >>>>>> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Found 0 hosts for >>>>>>>> allocation after prioritization: [] >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,568 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator] >>>>>> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Looking for >>>>>>>> speed=500Mhz, >>>>>>>> Ram=512 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,568 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator] >>>>>> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Host Allocator >>>>>>>> returning >>>>>> 0 >>>>>>>> suitable hosts >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,568 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) No suitable hosts found >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,568 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) No suitable hosts found under this Cluster: 3 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,568 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] >> (Job- >>>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) Could not find suitable Deployment >> Destination >>>>>> for >>>>>>>> this VM under any clusters, returning. >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,654 DEBUG >> [cloud.capacity.CapacityManagerImpl] >>>>>>>> (Job-Executor-2:job-52) VM state transitted from :Starting to >>>>>> Stopped >>>>>>>> with event: OperationFailedvm's original host id: null new host >> id: >>>>>>>> null host id before state tran >>>>>>>> sition: null >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,754 DEBUG >> [cloud.capacity.CapacityManagerImpl] >>>>>>>> (Job-Executor-2:job-52) VM state transitted from :Stopped to >> Error >>>>>> with >>>>>>>> event: OperationFailedToErrorvm's original host id: null new >> host >>>> id: >>>>>>>> null host id before state >>>>>>>> transition: null >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,800 DEBUG [agent.manager.AgentManagerImpl] >>>>>>>> (AgentManager-Handler-15:null) SeqA 3-187783: Processing Seq 3- >>>>>> 187783: >>>>>>>> { Cmd , MgmtId: -1, via: 3, Ver: v1, Flags: 11, >>>>>>>> [{"ConsoleProxyLoadReportCommand":{"_proxyVmId":2,"_ >>>>>>>> loadInfo":"{\n \"connections\": [\n {\n \"id\": 524,\n >>>>>>>> \"clientInfo\": \"\",\n \"host\": \"10.1.11.3\",\n >>>>>> \"port\": >>>>>>>> 5906,\n \"tag\": \"\",\n \"createTime\": >>>> 1341997999371,\n >>>>>>>> \"lastUsedTime\": 1341 >>>>>>>> 997999371\n },\n {\n \"id\": 8,\n \"clientInfo\": >>>>>>>> \"\",\n \"host\": \"10.1.11.4\",\n \"port\": 5902,\n >>>>>>>> \"tag\": \"c43d83ff-35e0-4eb6-87b4-d56f7a2929f9\",\n >>>>>>>> \"createTime\": 1341904048748,\n \"las >>>>>>>> tUsedTime\": 1341998035188\n }\n ]\n}","wait":0}}] } >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,857 DEBUG [agent.manager.AgentManagerImpl] >>>>>>>> (AgentManager-Handler-15:null) SeqA 3-187783: Sending Seq 3- >> 187783: >>>>>>>> { Ans: , MgmtId: 74142025330, via: 3, Ver: v1, Flags: 100010, >>>>>>>> [{"AgentControlAnswer":{"result":true,"wa >>>>>>>> it":0}}] } >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:59,133 INFO [api.commands.DeployVMCmd] (Job- >>>>>> Executor- >>>>>>>> 2:job-52) >> com.cloud.exception.InsufficientServerCapacityException: >>>>>>>> Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-2-18- >>>> VM]Scope=interface >>>>>>>> com.cloud.dc.DataCenter; id=2 >>>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:59,134 WARN [cloud.api.ApiDispatcher] (Job- >>>>>> Executor- >>>>>>>> 2:job-52) class com.cloud.api.ServerApiException : Unable to >>>> create >>>>>> a >>>>>>>> deployment for VM[User|i-2-18-VM] >>>>>>>> ------------- >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> So after looking for the exact same thing "Looking for >>>>>>>> speed=500Mhz, Ram=512" in both cases, the template passes (or >>>>>>>> atleast proceeds to >>>>>> do >>>>>>>> further checks, and eventually passing) and the ISO immediately >>>>>> fails. >>>>>>>> Is there something I'm doing wrong? Is this a bug that needs to >>>> be >>>>>>>> patched or looked in to? Or, is there another way to create a >>>>>> template >>>>>>>> other than deploying with an ISO and creating a template off >> that >>>>>>>> deployment? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Environment info: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cloudstack 3.0.2 >>>>>>>> ISO Tried - CentOS 6.2 minimal (both x86 and x64), Ubuntu Server >>>>>> 12.04, >>>>>>>> CentOS 5.8 Netinstall >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>>>> Caleb >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> >
