Hi Ahmad,

I have nothing changed during the upgrade and no problems found too.  The 
Network works fine.

But all-clear. I have also destroyed the console proxy to look the result what 
happens.
After a restart the cloud-management service the function 
"storage.secondary.SecondaryStorageManagerImpl"  create a new secstorage vm.
and the console Proxy comes up too.

For the documentation it's maybe helpful.
For this problem destroy all system-vms in the zone and restart the managent 
service. that's it.

I have no trivial erros found in the log.
Also i found no command "storage.secondary.SecondaryStorageManagerImpl" this 
was missing!


New log:
2013-02-05 19:12:49,143 DEBUG [storage.secondary.SecondaryStorageManagerImpl] 
(secstorage-1:null) Zone 1 is ready to launch secondary storage VM
2013-02-05 19:12:49,231 INFO  
[cloud.secstorage.PremiumSecondaryStorageManagerImpl] (secstorage-1:null) No 
running secondary storage vms found in datacenter id=1, starting one
2013-02-05 19:12:49,263 INFO  [storage.secondary.SecondaryStorageManagerImpl] 
(secstorage-1:null) No stopped secondary storage vm is available, need to 
allocate a new secondary storage vm
2013-02-05 19:12:49,266 DEBUG [storage.secondary.SecondaryStorageManagerImpl] 
(secstorage-1:null) Assign secondary storage vm from a newly started instance 
for request from data center : 1
2013-02-05 19:12:49,344 DEBUG [cloud.network.NetworkManagerImpl] 
(secstorage-1:null) Found existing network configuration for offering [Network 
Offering [1-Public-System-Public-Network]: Ntwk[200|Public|1]



Many thanks from Germany and for your help!!!
Andreas



----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----

Von: "Ahmad Emneina" <aemne...@gmail.com>
An: "Andreas Huser" <ahu...@7five-edv.de>
CC: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
Gesendet: Dienstag, 5. Februar 2013 20:22:57
Betreff: Re: ssvm not re-created after removed

Was this setup working at some point? Has anything changed in the
networking? Maybe the its a new host and the configuration hasnt been
applied yet.... what I see is cloudstack tries to deploy your system vm's
but cant ping them on their public interface:
2013-02-02 23:12:36,511 WARN [cloud.consoleproxy.ConsoleProxyManagerImpl]
(Job-Executor-26:job-91) Unable to ssh to the VM: Can not ping System vm
v-1240-VMdue to:Unable to connect



On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 6:35 AM, Andreas Huser <ahu...@7five-edv.de> wrote: 

> Hi Ahmad,
>
> thanks for your reply!
>
> I meant the ssvm has an error. then i have deleted it over cloudstack.
> Infrastructure > Zone > System VM > "Destroy"
>
> At the previous version of cloudstack (3.0.2) a fresh ssvm takes maximum 
> 30 seconds for the automatic new creation.
>
> In the logs i have no info. No errors for creating a new ssvm.
> I think the management Server initialized not the command to provision for
> a new ssvm.
>
> I check the database and see the destroyed ssvm are correctly deleted.
>
> Here the logs, beginning at the ssvm destroy.
> http://pastebin.com/knKJgL5S
>
> can i not trigger a manual creation for a new ssvm over cli?
>
> many Thanks!
> Regards
> Andreas
>
>
>
>
> ----- Ursprüngliche Mail -----
>
> Von: "Ahmad Emneina" <aemne...@gmail.com>
> An: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> Gesendet: Montag, 4. Februar 2013 20:00:59
> Betreff: Re: ssvm not re-created after removed
>
> Hey Andreas... can you post the logs to a place we can all view them, maybe
> pastebin.com. Also this should be recoverable. What do you mean by
> manually
> deleting the ssvm? Did you do that on the host or via cloudstack. You might
> need to mend your db to reflect the vm is completely gone, or use the
> destroysystemvm api call.
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 3:13 AM, Andreas Huser <ahu...@7five-edv.de> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have delete manual my secondary storage vm after upgrade from 3.0.2 to
> > 4.0.
> > And now they will not be created again automatically, what can I do.
> >
> > In the log files is not something you can use. Only "here is no secondary
> > storage VM for secondary storage host"
> > Can we create manual trigger to deploy a new SSVM?
> >
> > Regards
> > Andreas
> >
>

Reply via email to