Hi - I just applied Daniel's patch from this thread (its on list now for approval). After fixing a minor typo it solved an issue we saw in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-257 (errors getting a list of instances).
I have two questions though: 1. Is there a way to determine the version of ON you are talking to? If I understand correctly, this patch brings us to ON 3.6 compatibility? This is what David Lutterkort was trying to gage - is it possible to determine the version and if so is it worth trying to 'fall back' to ON 3.x? Or are you happy with just requiring users to always be on latest version? 2. In https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-257, the reporter (in cc here) mentions something I also noticed about the Machine states. You can only 'destroy' a machine when it is running. At first I thought this was an error - looking at the defined state machine in the opennebula driver: 143 define_instance_states do$ 144 start.to(:pending) .on( :create )$ 145 pending.to(:running) .automatically$ 146 stopped.to(:running) .on( :start )$ 147 running.to(:running) .on( :reboot )$ 148 running.to(:stopping) .on( :stop )$ 149 stopping.to(:stopped) .automatically$ 150 running.to(:stopping) .on( :destroy )$ 151 stopping.to(:finish) .automatically$ 152 end$ Are these states correct? Look at lines 148, 150 for example. After checking http://opennebula.org/documentation:archives:rel3.0:vm_guide_2 it seems that 'destroy only when running' is intended behaviour. Can you please confirm that? Thanks again for your support, marios On 10/07/12 19:55, [email protected] wrote: > Hi Daniel, Ruben, > > I thought it'd be appropriate to add to this thread and revive the > conversation; we've had a couple of bugs filed recently against the ON > driver; I'd be really grateful if you could have a look: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-257 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DTACLOUD-258 > > In particular 257 as I couldn't quite get to the bottom of that one - > but also 258 as my solution imo is just a 'band-aid' - I think these > issues are indicative of a gap between the ON OCCI version the driver > was written for (3.2) and the current version running @ > http://occi.c12g.com/ (I assume this is 3.6 from you earlier comments?). > > As you guys are obviously the OpenNebula experts - I'd appreciate any > thoughts and comments and also I'd ask whether you had the time to take > a look at the current driver. There's no need for duplication of effort; > otherwise I'll be putting it on my to-do list for the near future. > > As always thank you very much for your time and consideration, > > all the best, marios > > > On 04/07/12 14:59, David Lutterkort wrote: >> On Wed, 2012-07-04 at 11:56 +0200, Ruben S. Montero wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> Do you mean back-porting the verbose option to OpenNebula 3.2? In this >>> line, we plan for our short roadmap to include a version API call so >>> clients can get the version of the server and adapt themselves to it. >>> >>> BTW, in OpenNebula.org we only support the last stable release, and >>> encourage people to upgrade. The next stable release (3.6) is scheduled for >>> next week. This will make OpenNebula 3.2 two versions behind the last >>> stable. So I think we could just update the driver to use verbose mode, and >>> throw an exception if the call is not supported. >> >> I meant: what's the patch that should be committed to the Deltacloud >> driver for OpenNebula ? >> >> I don't think we should just throw an exception, I'd rather the driver >> is smart enough to fall back to the (slow) way of doing things it's >> doing now if the ON instance doesn't support the verbose query param. >> >> David >> >> > >
