All,
Other than Mike's blocker fix #2098, do we have any other outstanding issues blocking the 4.10.0.0 release? Regards. ________________________________ From: Tutkowski, Mike <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> Sent: 12 May 2017 01:53:44 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: Will Stevens; Wido den Hollander Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.10.0.0 - RC2 Hi Rajani, I opened the following PR (against master) to fix the blocker CLOUDSTACK-9917: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2098 Thanks! Mike On 5/10/17, 10:40 PM, "Rajani Karuturi" <raj...@apache.org> wrote: Thanks for testing Mike. RC3=RC2+PR#2089+Mike'sPR Any other additions? ~ Rajani http://cloudplatform.accelerite.com/ On May 10, 2017 at 7:47 PM, Tutkowski, Mike (mike.tutkow...@netapp.com) wrote: I've been running regression tests against the release candidate. So far, all tests but one have passed. The failing test is related to the storage cleanup thread. It looks like some code was changed in 4.10 with regards to this thread and that change is causing a problem around cleanup for managed storage in a particular situation. As a result of this, I was going to vote -1. I'm guessing the fix will not be complicated, but is important. I don't yet have the fix, however. Once I do, I can reply to this thread. On May 10, 2017, at 5:47 AM, Rajani Karuturi <raj...@apache.org> wrote: I agree to your concerns Wido. I did check the PR before creating RC2. There were some outstanding comments on it. If no one has started testing RC2 and there are no objections, we can cancel this vote, quickly merge the PR and create RC3. ~ Rajani http://cloudplatform.accelerite.com/ On May 10, 2017 at 3:04 PM, Wido den Hollander (w...@widodh.nl) wrote: Op 10 mei 2017 om 0:33 schreef Will Stevens <williamstev...@gmail.com>: Just to clarify. Wido, the issue you are experiencing is only with basic networks and also exists in 4.9 right? The issue becomes noticeable when you have a lot of networks. Is that a fair statement? Well, the provisioning is the same between Basic and Advanced. The VR is utterly slow in doing that. It happens when you have a lot of VMs in those networks. In our case we have a couple of thousands VMs. What I'd like to prevent is that this is merged into 4.9.3, but is not in 4.10. However, I don't want to delay 4.10 any longer. Wido On May 9, 2017 5:39 PM, "Wido den Hollander" <w...@widodh.nl> wrote: +0 I don't want to VOTE -1 due to a bug we are facing, but for us 4.10 would be a problem due to the VR performance. A PR is open for this, but I also don't want to delay 4.10 any longer: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2089 Technically the VR works, it is just that deployment is utterly slow. Wido Op 9 mei 2017 om 7:31 schreef Rajani Karuturi <raj...@apache.org>: Hi All, I've created a 4.10.0.0 release, with the following artifacts up for a vote: Git Branch and Commit SH: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=commit;h= fadc80d50f9e95012c9ff3644b60b600c6f65204 Commit:fadc80d50f9e95012c9ff3644b60b600c6f65204 Branch: 4.10.0.0-RC20170509T1030 Source release (checksums and signatures are available at the same location): https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cloudstack/4.10.0.0/ PGP release keys (signed using CBB44821): https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/release/cloudstack/KEYS Vote will be open for 72 hours. For sanity in tallying the vote, can PMC members please be sure to indicate "(binding)" with their vote [ ] +1 approve [ ] +0 no opinion [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why) ~Rajani http://cloudplatform.accelerite.com/ rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com www.shapeblue.com 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
