Marcus,
What is the latest commit you have picked up on your local setup from
master? Our QA reports similar issues caused by recent VMSync bug fix,
just want to make sure that your local code has that fix.
Thanks
-min
On 3/14/14 9:37 AM, "Min Chen" <min.c...@citrix.com> wrote:
>Before merge, I did a sanity zone and VM deployment test, and worked fine
>on my setup after fixing the issues introduced by Antonio's commit. I can
>verify this again today. From the symptom, it seems not related to IAM
>change.
>
>Thanks
>-min
>
>
>
>On 3/14/14 1:07 AM, "Marcus" <shadow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>creating a new router does the same...
>>
>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,446 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Unable to update
>>VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running; updated=3;
>>time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1; State=Running;
>>updated=3; time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} Stale Data: {Host=1;
>>State=Starting; updated=2; time=Fri Mar 14 02:05:52 MDT 2014}
>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,448 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Failed to start
>>instance VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]
>>com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>>to a new state.
>>at
>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineMan
>>a
>>gerImpl.java:1029)
>>at
>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.advanceStart(VirtualMachineManager
>>I
>>mpl.java:775)
>>
>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Marcus <shadow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I have no idea if its related to this branch merge or not, but I'm
>>> unable to start the ssvm on master since I pulled about an hour ago. I
>>> can deploy a fresh zone, and the ssvm will actually start, but it
>>> can't transition state in the DB, so it kills the vm.
>>>
>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,356 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Unable to update
>>> VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running;
>>> updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1;
>>> State=Running; updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} Stale
>>> Data: {Host=1; State=Starting; updated=18; time=Fri Mar 14 01:56:38
>>> MDT 2014}
>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,359 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Failed to start
>>> instance VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]
>>> com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to transition
>>> to a new state.
>>> at
>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineMa
>>>n
>>>agerImpl.java:1029)
>>> at
>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineMa
>>>n
>>>agerImpl.java:5129)
>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>> at
>>>sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.jav
>>>a
>>>:57)
>>> at
>>>sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessor
>>>I
>>>mpl.java:43)
>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>>> at
>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.handleVmWorkJob(VmWorkJobHandlerProxy
>>>.
>>>java:107)
>>> at
>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.handleVmWorkJob(VirtualMachineMan
>>>a
>>>gerImpl.java:5274)
>>> at
>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:102)
>>> at
>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.runInCon
>>>t
>>>ext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:491)
>>> at
>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(Manag
>>>e
>>>dContextRunnable.java:49)
>>> at
>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call(
>>>D
>>>efaultManagedContext.java:56)
>>> at
>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWit
>>>h
>>>Context(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
>>> at
>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWith
>>>C
>>>ontext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
>>> at
>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(Managed
>>>C
>>>ontextRunnable.java:46)
>>> at
>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run(Asyn
>>>c
>>>JobManagerImpl.java:448)
>>> at
>>>java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:471)
>>> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
>>> at
>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.jav
>>>a
>>>:1145)
>>> at
>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.ja
>>>v
>>>a:615)
>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Marcus <shadow...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded whether we
>>>> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come in, or preserve
>>>> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot easier to undo
>>>> a squashed merge.
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <min.c...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> -min
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <min.c...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this merge for 3 days, I
>>>>>>am
>>>>>>going to merge it to master today.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>-min
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <h...@trippaers.nl> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <min.c...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our branch and addressed all
>>>>>>>>new
>>>>>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <min.c...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM, "Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>> <chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min Chen" <min.c...@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to merge CloudStack Identity and Access
>>>>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services to the master branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>Development
>>>>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>>>>> this effort has been done by Prachi and me on ACS rbac branch
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=shor
>>>>>>>>>>>t
>>>>>>>>>>>log;
>>>>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/CloudStac
>>>>>>>>>>>k
>>>>>>>>>>>+Ide
>>>>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin. We have proposed this
>>>>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test (for iam plugin).
>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests for the feature are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>
