[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1681: CLOUDSTACK-9491: incorrect parsing of device list to...
Github user sateesh-chodapuneedi commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1681 @murali-reddy Makes sense to get fresh listing of virtual NICs in next iteration as the first iteration might have missed the hot-plugged virtual NIC (for VPC tier being configured). Though one side effect is we will loop through all the virtual NICs, except the newly hot-plugged NIC, at least one more time. Can you please see if we can avoid repeating the command 'ip address show' for the virtual NICs that were already verified to be not matching. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1681: CLOUDSTACK-9491: incorrect parsing of device list to...
Github user abhinandanprateek commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1681 The fix looks like the correct thing to do. @muali-reddy LGTM for code review. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1681: CLOUDSTACK-9491: incorrect parsing of device list to...
Github user serg38 commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1681 @murali-reddy Thanks for the explanation. LGTM for code review --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1674: CLOUDSTACK-9460: For long running transactions, if t...
Github user murali-reddy commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1674 LGTM from the code change. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1684: CLOUDSTACK-9489: the new config vars that are...
GitHub user abhinandanprateek opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1684 CLOUDSTACK-9489: the new config vars that are added do not goto DB if⦠⦠values are set to NULL, removing this check so the entries in DB are made with NULL values You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running: $ git pull https://github.com/shapeblue/cloudstack cloudstack-9489 Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1684.patch To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch with (at least) the following in the commit message: This closes #1684 commit a39cc61fc61a52b5d57e963a9a6a2d6f0e951c28 Author: Abhinandan Prateek Date: 2016-09-23T05:28:11Z CLOUDSTACK-9489: the new config vars that are added do not goto DB if values are set to NULL, removing this check so the entries in DB are made with NULL values --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1681: CLOUDSTACK-9491: incorrect parsing of device list to...
Github user murali-reddy commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1681 @serg38 Though same code path, i ran into different issue. When i was adding new tier to VPC, eth3 was plugged into VR from vCenter. As commented in the function there is delay for ethernet device to appear in the guest instance. I could see code loops through eth0, eth1, eth2 only, because it read the '/proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf' too early. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user mike-tutkowski commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 Thanks for running that, @serg38! --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR
Matthew, Please see https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Extending+CloudStack+Networking Thanks, Murali On 22/09/16, 11:23 PM, "Matthew Smart" wrote: >Hey Murali, > >I have been reading through the API and other documentation to try to >get a basic understanding of the network service offering abstraction >methodology in CS. I have not dove into the code yet but before I did I >thought I would try a different approach. > >Imagine I were to come to this list and say that I have a network >offering that I sell and that I wanted to write whatever I needed to in >order to integrate it as an offering in CloudStack. Is there some >specific documentation and guidelines you would direct me to read in >order to gather the knowledge necessary to create a cloudstack >compatible interface for my product? > >I don't know the history but I see several products that have navigated >this process (Nuage, Nicira, ...etc) and am wondering how a new provider >would work with you guys to navigate that process. If this is too vague, >we can pretend my new offering is a hardware firewall device. > >My goal here is to gain an understanding of how CS interacts with third >party offerings underneath the hood. I have some thoughts (I think >inline with Will Steven's brain dump and diagram) but want to make sure >I am not suffering some misapprehensions about the architecture and, >short of tracing code, was not successful at finding the information I >needed to satisfy myself that I know how it is designed. > >Thanks, > >Matthew Smart >President >Smart Software Solutions Inc. >108 S Pierre St. >Pierre, SD 57501 > >Phone: (605) 280-0383 >Skype: msmart13 >Email: msm...@smartsoftwareinc.com > >On 09/20/2016 04:54 AM, Murali Reddy wrote: >> Configuration management of network appliances particularly for Cloud and >> NFV scenarios is still evolving area. Programmability is the not the >> strength for even the most popular network operating systems like IOS, JunoS >> etc. So its not surprising why CloudStack integrates in a archaic way with >> stock linux for the VR. >> >> VR was never integral/hardcoded option in CloudStack. Its always been a >> plugin. CloudStack network orchestration is well abstracted and designed >> with vision to compose a network with different set of providers for >> different services. Yes that vision is not fully realised yet, and we don’t >> have true service function chains. That would be different discussion topic. >> >> I tend to agree with Simon, as alternate/interim option we can take hard >> look whats causing the problems with current VR integration. Personally, I >> think it would be easier we take a cue from configuration managers and >> network configuration solutions out there (for e.g promise theory based >> Cisco ACI) move to more declarative model of expressing desired state of >> network configuration. Infact current VR from 4.6, actually holds the >> desired state per service basis, seems to be in that direction. >> >> It does make sense to evaluate new appliances which can provide rich >> semantics (like programmable API, declarative configuration, versioning, >> commit/rollback etc), but will need significant engineering effort and time >> to stabilise. We may make same mistakes with integration of other appliance >> as well, if we fully don’t understand the nature of the current problems >> with CloudStack core and service provider interaction and current VR >> integration. >> >> >> On 16/09/16, 11:59 PM, "Simon Weller" wrote: >> >>> I think our other option is to take a real look at what it would take to >>> fix the VR. In my opinion, a lot of the problems are related to the >>> monolithic python code base and the fact nothing is actually separated. >>> >>> Secondly, the python scripts (and bash scripts) don't use any established >>> libraries to complete tasks and instead shell out and run commands that are >>> both hard to track and hard to parse on return. >>> >>> >>> If we daemonized this, used a real api for Agent to VR communication, used >>> common already existing libraries for the system service and network >>> interactions and spent a bit of time separating out code into distinct >>> modules, everything would behave a lot better. >>> >>> >>> The pain and suffering is due to years and years of patches and constant >>> shelling out to complete tasks in my opinion. If we spend time to rethink >>> how we interact with the VR in general and we abstract the systems and >>> networking stuff and use well known and stable libraries to do the work, >>> the VR would be much easier to maintain. >>> >>> >>> - Si >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Marty Godsey >>> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 12:24 PM >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org >>> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR >>> >>> So based upon this discussion would it be prudent to wait on VyOS 2.0? The >>> current VR is giving us
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1659: CLOUDSTACK-9339 Virtual Routers don't handle Multipl...
Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1659 Trillian test result (#21) Environment: vmware-55u3 (x2), Advanced Networking Total time taken: 27908s Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr1659-t21-vmware-55u3.zip Test completed. 45 look ok, 8 have errors Test | Result | Time (s) --- | --- | --- test_04_rvpc_privategw_static_routes | `Failure` | 382.998 test_04_rvpc_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces | `Failure` | 598.977 test_03_vpc_privategw_restart_vpc_cleanup | `Failure` | 202.177 test_03_vpc_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces | `Failure` | 120.997 test_03_RVR_Network_check_router_state | `Failure` | 308.858 test_02_vpc_privategw_static_routes | `Failure` | 207.177 test_02_internallb_roundrobin_1RVPC_3VM_HTTP_port80 | `Failure` | 631.260 test_02_RVR_Network_FW_PF_SSH_default_routes_egress_false | `Failure` | 565.425 test_01_vpc_privategw_acl | `Failure` | 111.862 test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80 | `Failure` | 430.487 test_01_RVR_Network_FW_PF_SSH_default_routes_egress_true | `Failure` | 464.304 test_router_dhcphosts | `Error` | 834.237 test_isolate_network_password_server | `Error` | 829.874 test_02_routervm_iptables_policies | `Error` | 888.488 test_01_vpc_site2site_vpn | `Error` | 485.994 test_01_vpc_remote_access_vpn | `Error` | 0.075 test_01_test_vm_volume_snapshot | `Error` | 191.106 test_01_single_VPC_iptables_policies | `Error` | 1026.261 test_01_redundant_vpc_site2site_vpn | `Error` | 716.864 ContextSuite context=TestRouterDHCPHosts>:teardown | `Error` | 855.313 test_router_dns_guestipquery | Success | 76.640 test_router_dns_externalipquery | Success | 0.054 test_reboot_router | Success | 629.192 test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_3_Load_Balancer_Rule | Success | 76.555 test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_2_nat_rule | Success | 61.441 test_network_rules_acquired_public_ip_1_static_nat_rule | Success | 124.970 test_network_acl | Success | 151.231 test_deployvm_userdata_post | Success | 30.430 test_deployvm_userdata | Success | 211.457 test_deploy_vm_from_iso | Success | 458.299 test_createRegion | Success | 0.041 test_assign_and_removal_lb | Success | 148.691 test_10_destroy_cpvm | Success | 261.579 test_10_attachAndDetach_iso | Success | 71.746 test_09_destroy_ssvm | Success | 244.470 test_08_reboot_cpvm | Success | 156.414 test_07_reboot_ssvm | Success | 158.193 test_06_stop_cpvm | Success | 176.587 test_06_download_detached_volume | Success | 55.413 test_05_stop_ssvm | Success | 173.415 test_05_rvpc_multi_tiers | Success | 684.340 test_04_rvpc_network_garbage_collector_nics | Success | 880.461 test_04_restart_network_wo_cleanup | Success | 5.583 test_04_extract_template | Success | 10.176 test_04_extract_Iso | Success | 5.132 test_04_cpvm_internals | Success | 1.087 test_04_change_offering_small | Success | 96.901 test_03_ssvm_internals | Success | 3.339 test_03_delete_vm_snapshots | Success | 275.207 test_03_delete_iso | Success | 95.118 test_03_create_redundant_VPC_1tier_2VMs_2IPs_2PF_ACL_reboot_routers | Success | 736.715 test_02_revert_vm_snapshots | Success | 227.063 test_02_redundant_VPC_default_routes | Success | 651.796 test_02_port_fwd_on_non_src_nat | Success | 55.453 test_02_isolate_network_FW_PF_default_routes_egress_false | Success | 321.366 test_02_edit_iso | Success | 0.066 test_02_deploy_vm_root_resize | Success | 6.193 test_02_create_lb_rule_non_nat | Success | 207.381 test_02_attach_volume | Success | 48.971 test_02_VPC_default_routes | Success | 324.804 test_01_snapshot_root_disk | Success | 146.564 test_01_router_internal_basic | Success | 0.488 test_01_port_fwd_on_src_nat | Success | 111.674 test_01_nic | Success | 795.582 test_01_isolate_network_FW_PF_default_routes_egress_true | Success | 306.420 test_01_deploy_vm_root_resize | Success | 6.179 test_01_create_volume | Success | 512.345 test_01_create_vm_snapshots | Success | 161.679 test_01_create_redundant_VPC_2tiers_4VMs_4IPs_4PF_ACL | Success | 1372.001 test_01_create_lb_rule_src_nat | Success | 207.685 test_01_create_iso | Success | 66.303 test_01_VPC_nics_after_destroy | Success | 674.828 test_00_deploy_vm_root_resize | Success | 6.339 test_deploy_vgpu_enabled_vm | Skipped | 0.004 test_08_resize_volume | Skipped | 5.092 test_07_resize_fail | Skipped | 10.196 test_06_copy_template | Skipped | 0.000 test_01_primary_storage_iscsi | Skipped | 0.028 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user serg38 commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 LGTM testing on Vmware hardware. RHEL 6 management servers, ESX 5.5 and 6 hypervisors, advanced networking ``` test DeployVM in anti-affinity groups for project ... === TestName: test_DeployVmAntiAffinityGroup_in_project | Status : SUCCESS === test DeployVM in anti-affinity groups ... === TestName: test_DeployVmAntiAffinityGroup | Status : SUCCESS === Test Deploy Virtual Machine from ISO ... === TestName: test_deploy_vm_from_iso | Status : SUCCESS === Test deploy virtual machine with root resize ... === TestName: test_00_deploy_vm_root_resize | Status : SUCCESS === Test proper failure to deploy virtual machine with rootdisksize of 0 ... === TestName: test_01_deploy_vm_root_resize | Status : SUCCESS === Test proper failure to deploy virtual machine with rootdisksize less than template size ... === TestName: test_02_deploy_vm_root_resize | Status : SUCCESS === Test to deploy vm with a first fit offering ... === TestName: test_deployvm_firstfit | Status : SUCCESS === Test deploy VMs using user concentrated planner ... === TestName: test_deployvm_userconcentrated | Status : SUCCESS === Test deploy VMs using user dispersion planner ... === TestName: test_deployvm_userdispersing | Status : SUCCESS === Test userdata as GET, size > 2k ... === TestName: test_deployvm_userdata | Status : SUCCESS === Test userdata as POST, size > 2k ... === TestName: test_deployvm_userdata_post | Status : SUCCESS === Test to create disk offering ... === TestName: test_01_create_disk_offering | Status : SUCCESS === Test to create a sparse type disk offering ... === TestName: test_02_create_sparse_type_disk_offering | Status : SUCCESS === Test to create a sparse type disk offering ... === TestName: test_04_create_fat_type_disk_offering | Status : SUCCESS === Test to update existing disk offering ... === TestName: test_02_edit_disk_offering | Status : SUCCESS === Test to delete disk offering ... === TestName: test_03_delete_disk_offering | Status : SUCCESS === Test to ensure 4 default roles cannot be deleted ... SKIP: Dynamic Role-Based API checker not enabled, skipping test Test to check role, role permissions and account life cycles ... SKIP: Dynamic Role-Based API checker not enabled, skipping test Test for role-rule enforcement in case of multiple mgmt servers ... SKIP: Dynamic Role-Based API checker not enabled, skipping test Test to ensure role in use cannot be deleted ... SKIP: Dynamic Role-Based API checker not enabled, skipping test Tests normal lifecycle operations for roles ... SKIP: Dynamic Role-Based API checker not enabled, skipping test Tests role update ... SKIP: Dynamic Role-Based API checker not enabled, skipping test Tests that default four roles exist ... SKIP: Dynamic Role-Based API checker not enabled, skipping test Tests role update ... SKIP: Dynamic Role-Based API checker not enabled, skipping test Tests role update when role is in use by an account ... SKIP: Dynamic Role-Based API checker not enabled, skipping test Tests concurrent order updation of role permission ... SKIP: Dynamic Role-Based API checker not enabled, skipping test Tests creation of role permission ... SKIP: Dynamic Role-Based API checker not enabled, skipping test Tests deletion of role permission ... SKIP: Dynamic Role-Based API checker not enabled, skipping test Tests listing of default role's permission ... SKIP: Dynamic Role-Based API checker not enabled, skipping test Tests order updation of role permission ... SKIP: Dynamic Role-Based API checker not enabled, skipping test test update configuration setting at zone level scope ... === TestName: test_UpdateConfigParamWithScope | Status : SUCCESS === Test guest vlan range dedication ... === TestName: test_dedicateGuestVlanRange | Status : SUCCESS === Test create public & private ISO ... === TestName: test_01_create_iso | Status : SUCCESS === Test Edit ISO ... === TestName: test_02_edit_iso | Status : SUCCESS === Test delete ISO ... === TestName: test_03_delete_iso | Status : SUCCESS === Test for extract ISO ... === TestName: test_04_extract_Iso | Status : SUCCESS === Update & Test for ISO permissions ... === TestName: test_05_iso_permissions | Status : SUCCESS === Test for copy ISO from one zone to another ... SKIP: Not enough zones available to perform copy template Test delete ISO ... === TestName: test_07_list_default_iso | Status : SUCCESS === Test listing Volumes using 'ids' parameter ... === TestName: test_01_list_volumes | Status : SUCCESS === Test listing Templates using 'ids' parameter ... === TestName: test_02_list_templates | Status : SUCCESS === Test listing Snapshots using 'ids' parameter ... === TestName: test_03_list_snapshots | Status : SUCCESS === Test to cr
RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR
Well the community is in charge of the documentation, so all of us. My colleague Pierre-Luc and I have spent quite a bit of time with the docs, but we have not attacked this. There was an initiative earlier this year to improve the docs, but I am not sure how far they got. On Sep 22, 2016 2:37 PM, "Marty Godsey" wrote: > Seems like we need someone to step up and document the process of this. I > would offer however I am not a coder so I would not get far. > > How is "in charge" of documentation of ACS? > > Regards, > Marty Godsey > > -Original Message- > From: Matthew Smart [mailto:msm...@smartsoftwareinc.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 2:35 PM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR > > Thanks Will. That is the answer I expected tbh. But it never hurts to ask! > > Matthew Smart > President > Smart Software Solutions Inc. > 108 S Pierre St. > Pierre, SD 57501 > > Phone: (605) 280-0383 > Skype: msmart13 > Email: msm...@smartsoftwareinc.com > > On 09/22/2016 01:24 PM, Will Stevens wrote: > > Unfortunately there is not much documentation around the network > > plugin functionality. When I wrote the Palo Alto integration I > > basically figured out how to do it by reviewing existing plugins and > just figuring it out. > > > > So if you were to begin to implement a new hardware firewall for > > example, I would point you to the Palo Alto integration code [1] and > > the functional spec [2] and then make myself available to try to > > answer any questions you have (like how the NetworkGuru works, where > > the different pieces are registered, etc)... > > > > Unfortunately it is not trivial, mainly because we don't have any > > documentation to follow, but the plugin interface IS there. It just > > requires people who have worked it in the past to offer guidance. > > > > [1] > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/tree/master/plugins/network-eleme > > nts/palo-alto > > [2] > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Palo+Alto+Firew > > all+Integration > > > > *Will STEVENS* > > Lead Developer > > > > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts > > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw > > @CloudOps_ > > > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Matthew Smart > > > > wrote: > > > >> Hey Murali, > >> > >> I have been reading through the API and other documentation to try to > >> get a basic understanding of the network service offering abstraction > >> methodology in CS. I have not dove into the code yet but before I did > >> I thought I would try a different approach. > >> > >> Imagine I were to come to this list and say that I have a network > >> offering that I sell and that I wanted to write whatever I needed to > >> in order to integrate it as an offering in CloudStack. Is there some > >> specific documentation and guidelines you would direct me to read in > >> order to gather the knowledge necessary to create a cloudstack > >> compatible interface for my product? > >> > >> I don't know the history but I see several products that have > >> navigated this process (Nuage, Nicira, ...etc) and am wondering how a > >> new provider would work with you guys to navigate that process. If > >> this is too vague, we can pretend my new offering is a hardware > firewall device. > >> > >> My goal here is to gain an understanding of how CS interacts with > >> third party offerings underneath the hood. I have some thoughts (I > >> think inline with Will Steven's brain dump and diagram) but want to > >> make sure I am not suffering some misapprehensions about the > >> architecture and, short of tracing code, was not successful at > >> finding the information I needed to satisfy myself that I know how it > is designed. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Matthew Smart > >> President > >> Smart Software Solutions Inc. > >> 108 S Pierre St. > >> Pierre, SD 57501 > >> > >> Phone: (605) 280-0383 > >> Skype: msmart13 > >> Email: msm...@smartsoftwareinc.com > >> > >> On 09/20/2016 04:54 AM, Murali Reddy wrote: > >> > >>> Configuration management of network appliances particularly for > >>> Cloud and NFV scenarios is still evolving area. Programmability is > >>> the not the strength for even the most popular network operating > >>> systems like IOS, JunoS etc. So its not surprising why CloudStack > >>> integrates in a archaic way with stock linux for the VR. > >>> > >>> VR was never integral/hardcoded option in CloudStack. Its always > >>> been a plugin. CloudStack network orchestration is well abstracted > >>> and designed with vision to compose a network with different set of > >>> providers for different services. Yes that vision is not fully > >>> realised yet, and we don’t have true service function chains. That > would be different discussion topic. > >>> > >>> I tend to agree with Simon, as alternate/interim option we can take > >>> hard look whats causing the problems with current VR integration. > >>> Personally, I think it would be easier
RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR
Seems like we need someone to step up and document the process of this. I would offer however I am not a coder so I would not get far. How is "in charge" of documentation of ACS? Regards, Marty Godsey -Original Message- From: Matthew Smart [mailto:msm...@smartsoftwareinc.com] Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 2:35 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR Thanks Will. That is the answer I expected tbh. But it never hurts to ask! Matthew Smart President Smart Software Solutions Inc. 108 S Pierre St. Pierre, SD 57501 Phone: (605) 280-0383 Skype: msmart13 Email: msm...@smartsoftwareinc.com On 09/22/2016 01:24 PM, Will Stevens wrote: > Unfortunately there is not much documentation around the network > plugin functionality. When I wrote the Palo Alto integration I > basically figured out how to do it by reviewing existing plugins and just > figuring it out. > > So if you were to begin to implement a new hardware firewall for > example, I would point you to the Palo Alto integration code [1] and > the functional spec [2] and then make myself available to try to > answer any questions you have (like how the NetworkGuru works, where > the different pieces are registered, etc)... > > Unfortunately it is not trivial, mainly because we don't have any > documentation to follow, but the plugin interface IS there. It just > requires people who have worked it in the past to offer guidance. > > [1] > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/tree/master/plugins/network-eleme > nts/palo-alto > [2] > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Palo+Alto+Firew > all+Integration > > *Will STEVENS* > Lead Developer > > *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts > 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw > @CloudOps_ > > On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Matthew Smart > > wrote: > >> Hey Murali, >> >> I have been reading through the API and other documentation to try to >> get a basic understanding of the network service offering abstraction >> methodology in CS. I have not dove into the code yet but before I did >> I thought I would try a different approach. >> >> Imagine I were to come to this list and say that I have a network >> offering that I sell and that I wanted to write whatever I needed to >> in order to integrate it as an offering in CloudStack. Is there some >> specific documentation and guidelines you would direct me to read in >> order to gather the knowledge necessary to create a cloudstack >> compatible interface for my product? >> >> I don't know the history but I see several products that have >> navigated this process (Nuage, Nicira, ...etc) and am wondering how a >> new provider would work with you guys to navigate that process. If >> this is too vague, we can pretend my new offering is a hardware firewall >> device. >> >> My goal here is to gain an understanding of how CS interacts with >> third party offerings underneath the hood. I have some thoughts (I >> think inline with Will Steven's brain dump and diagram) but want to >> make sure I am not suffering some misapprehensions about the >> architecture and, short of tracing code, was not successful at >> finding the information I needed to satisfy myself that I know how it is >> designed. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Matthew Smart >> President >> Smart Software Solutions Inc. >> 108 S Pierre St. >> Pierre, SD 57501 >> >> Phone: (605) 280-0383 >> Skype: msmart13 >> Email: msm...@smartsoftwareinc.com >> >> On 09/20/2016 04:54 AM, Murali Reddy wrote: >> >>> Configuration management of network appliances particularly for >>> Cloud and NFV scenarios is still evolving area. Programmability is >>> the not the strength for even the most popular network operating >>> systems like IOS, JunoS etc. So its not surprising why CloudStack >>> integrates in a archaic way with stock linux for the VR. >>> >>> VR was never integral/hardcoded option in CloudStack. Its always >>> been a plugin. CloudStack network orchestration is well abstracted >>> and designed with vision to compose a network with different set of >>> providers for different services. Yes that vision is not fully >>> realised yet, and we don’t have true service function chains. That would be >>> different discussion topic. >>> >>> I tend to agree with Simon, as alternate/interim option we can take >>> hard look whats causing the problems with current VR integration. >>> Personally, I think it would be easier we take a cue from >>> configuration managers and network configuration solutions out there >>> (for e.g promise theory based Cisco ACI) move to more declarative >>> model of expressing desired state of network configuration. Infact >>> current VR from 4.6, actually holds the desired state per service basis, >>> seems to be in that direction. >>> >>> It does make sense to evaluate new appliances which can provide rich >>> semantics (like programmable API, declarative configuration, >>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR
Thanks Will. That is the answer I expected tbh. But it never hurts to ask! Matthew Smart President Smart Software Solutions Inc. 108 S Pierre St. Pierre, SD 57501 Phone: (605) 280-0383 Skype: msmart13 Email: msm...@smartsoftwareinc.com On 09/22/2016 01:24 PM, Will Stevens wrote: Unfortunately there is not much documentation around the network plugin functionality. When I wrote the Palo Alto integration I basically figured out how to do it by reviewing existing plugins and just figuring it out. So if you were to begin to implement a new hardware firewall for example, I would point you to the Palo Alto integration code [1] and the functional spec [2] and then make myself available to try to answer any questions you have (like how the NetworkGuru works, where the different pieces are registered, etc)... Unfortunately it is not trivial, mainly because we don't have any documentation to follow, but the plugin interface IS there. It just requires people who have worked it in the past to offer guidance. [1] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/tree/master/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Palo+Alto+Firewall+Integration *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Matthew Smart wrote: Hey Murali, I have been reading through the API and other documentation to try to get a basic understanding of the network service offering abstraction methodology in CS. I have not dove into the code yet but before I did I thought I would try a different approach. Imagine I were to come to this list and say that I have a network offering that I sell and that I wanted to write whatever I needed to in order to integrate it as an offering in CloudStack. Is there some specific documentation and guidelines you would direct me to read in order to gather the knowledge necessary to create a cloudstack compatible interface for my product? I don't know the history but I see several products that have navigated this process (Nuage, Nicira, ...etc) and am wondering how a new provider would work with you guys to navigate that process. If this is too vague, we can pretend my new offering is a hardware firewall device. My goal here is to gain an understanding of how CS interacts with third party offerings underneath the hood. I have some thoughts (I think inline with Will Steven's brain dump and diagram) but want to make sure I am not suffering some misapprehensions about the architecture and, short of tracing code, was not successful at finding the information I needed to satisfy myself that I know how it is designed. Thanks, Matthew Smart President Smart Software Solutions Inc. 108 S Pierre St. Pierre, SD 57501 Phone: (605) 280-0383 Skype: msmart13 Email: msm...@smartsoftwareinc.com On 09/20/2016 04:54 AM, Murali Reddy wrote: Configuration management of network appliances particularly for Cloud and NFV scenarios is still evolving area. Programmability is the not the strength for even the most popular network operating systems like IOS, JunoS etc. So its not surprising why CloudStack integrates in a archaic way with stock linux for the VR. VR was never integral/hardcoded option in CloudStack. Its always been a plugin. CloudStack network orchestration is well abstracted and designed with vision to compose a network with different set of providers for different services. Yes that vision is not fully realised yet, and we don’t have true service function chains. That would be different discussion topic. I tend to agree with Simon, as alternate/interim option we can take hard look whats causing the problems with current VR integration. Personally, I think it would be easier we take a cue from configuration managers and network configuration solutions out there (for e.g promise theory based Cisco ACI) move to more declarative model of expressing desired state of network configuration. Infact current VR from 4.6, actually holds the desired state per service basis, seems to be in that direction. It does make sense to evaluate new appliances which can provide rich semantics (like programmable API, declarative configuration, versioning, commit/rollback etc), but will need significant engineering effort and time to stabilise. We may make same mistakes with integration of other appliance as well, if we fully don’t understand the nature of the current problems with CloudStack core and service provider interaction and current VR integration. On 16/09/16, 11:59 PM, "Simon Weller" wrote: I think our other option is to take a real look at what it would take to fix the VR. In my opinion, a lot of the problems are related to the monolithic python code base and the fact nothing is actually separated. Secondly, the python scripts (and bash scripts) don't use any established libraries to complete tasks and instead shell out and run command
Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR
Unfortunately there is not much documentation around the network plugin functionality. When I wrote the Palo Alto integration I basically figured out how to do it by reviewing existing plugins and just figuring it out. So if you were to begin to implement a new hardware firewall for example, I would point you to the Palo Alto integration code [1] and the functional spec [2] and then make myself available to try to answer any questions you have (like how the NetworkGuru works, where the different pieces are registered, etc)... Unfortunately it is not trivial, mainly because we don't have any documentation to follow, but the plugin interface IS there. It just requires people who have worked it in the past to offer guidance. [1] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/tree/master/plugins/network-elements/palo-alto [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Palo+Alto+Firewall+Integration *Will STEVENS* Lead Developer *CloudOps* *| *Cloud Solutions Experts 420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6 w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_ On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Matthew Smart wrote: > Hey Murali, > > I have been reading through the API and other documentation to try to get > a basic understanding of the network service offering abstraction > methodology in CS. I have not dove into the code yet but before I did I > thought I would try a different approach. > > Imagine I were to come to this list and say that I have a network offering > that I sell and that I wanted to write whatever I needed to in order to > integrate it as an offering in CloudStack. Is there some specific > documentation and guidelines you would direct me to read in order to gather > the knowledge necessary to create a cloudstack compatible interface for my > product? > > I don't know the history but I see several products that have navigated > this process (Nuage, Nicira, ...etc) and am wondering how a new provider > would work with you guys to navigate that process. If this is too vague, we > can pretend my new offering is a hardware firewall device. > > My goal here is to gain an understanding of how CS interacts with third > party offerings underneath the hood. I have some thoughts (I think inline > with Will Steven's brain dump and diagram) but want to make sure I am not > suffering some misapprehensions about the architecture and, short of > tracing code, was not successful at finding the information I needed to > satisfy myself that I know how it is designed. > > Thanks, > > Matthew Smart > President > Smart Software Solutions Inc. > 108 S Pierre St. > Pierre, SD 57501 > > Phone: (605) 280-0383 > Skype: msmart13 > Email: msm...@smartsoftwareinc.com > > On 09/20/2016 04:54 AM, Murali Reddy wrote: > >> Configuration management of network appliances particularly for Cloud and >> NFV scenarios is still evolving area. Programmability is the not the >> strength for even the most popular network operating systems like IOS, >> JunoS etc. So its not surprising why CloudStack integrates in a archaic way >> with stock linux for the VR. >> >> VR was never integral/hardcoded option in CloudStack. Its always been a >> plugin. CloudStack network orchestration is well abstracted and designed >> with vision to compose a network with different set of providers for >> different services. Yes that vision is not fully realised yet, and we don’t >> have true service function chains. That would be different discussion topic. >> >> I tend to agree with Simon, as alternate/interim option we can take hard >> look whats causing the problems with current VR integration. Personally, I >> think it would be easier we take a cue from configuration managers and >> network configuration solutions out there (for e.g promise theory based >> Cisco ACI) move to more declarative model of expressing desired state of >> network configuration. Infact current VR from 4.6, actually holds the >> desired state per service basis, seems to be in that direction. >> >> It does make sense to evaluate new appliances which can provide rich >> semantics (like programmable API, declarative configuration, versioning, >> commit/rollback etc), but will need significant engineering effort and time >> to stabilise. We may make same mistakes with integration of other appliance >> as well, if we fully don’t understand the nature of the current problems >> with CloudStack core and service provider interaction and current VR >> integration. >> >> >> On 16/09/16, 11:59 PM, "Simon Weller" wrote: >> >> I think our other option is to take a real look at what it would take to >>> fix the VR. In my opinion, a lot of the problems are related to the >>> monolithic python code base and the fact nothing is actually separated. >>> >>> Secondly, the python scripts (and bash scripts) don't use any >>> established libraries to complete tasks and instead shell out and run >>> commands that are both hard to track and hard to parse on return. >>> >>> >>> If we daemonized this, used a rea
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1677: CLOUDSTACK-8830 - [Vmware] VM snapshot fails for 12 ...
Github user serg38 commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1677 @jburwell Yes our VM snapshot test covers this (with the exception of the issue that @nvazquez asked in PR871 which is unrelated to this PR ) . We will post results of vmsnaphsot test run on ESX6 hypervisor which previously were failing. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1677: CLOUDSTACK-8830 - [Vmware] VM snapshot fails for 12 ...
Github user jburwell commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1677 @nvazquez @serg38 thank you for the background information -- we are working around a quirk in the VMware SDK not obscuring a CloudStack bug. Do our current snapshot tests cover this condition or should we add another test when running VMware 6 to validate taking snapshots immediately after starting a VM and waiting 12 minutes? --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
Re: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR
Hey Murali, I have been reading through the API and other documentation to try to get a basic understanding of the network service offering abstraction methodology in CS. I have not dove into the code yet but before I did I thought I would try a different approach. Imagine I were to come to this list and say that I have a network offering that I sell and that I wanted to write whatever I needed to in order to integrate it as an offering in CloudStack. Is there some specific documentation and guidelines you would direct me to read in order to gather the knowledge necessary to create a cloudstack compatible interface for my product? I don't know the history but I see several products that have navigated this process (Nuage, Nicira, ...etc) and am wondering how a new provider would work with you guys to navigate that process. If this is too vague, we can pretend my new offering is a hardware firewall device. My goal here is to gain an understanding of how CS interacts with third party offerings underneath the hood. I have some thoughts (I think inline with Will Steven's brain dump and diagram) but want to make sure I am not suffering some misapprehensions about the architecture and, short of tracing code, was not successful at finding the information I needed to satisfy myself that I know how it is designed. Thanks, Matthew Smart President Smart Software Solutions Inc. 108 S Pierre St. Pierre, SD 57501 Phone: (605) 280-0383 Skype: msmart13 Email: msm...@smartsoftwareinc.com On 09/20/2016 04:54 AM, Murali Reddy wrote: Configuration management of network appliances particularly for Cloud and NFV scenarios is still evolving area. Programmability is the not the strength for even the most popular network operating systems like IOS, JunoS etc. So its not surprising why CloudStack integrates in a archaic way with stock linux for the VR. VR was never integral/hardcoded option in CloudStack. Its always been a plugin. CloudStack network orchestration is well abstracted and designed with vision to compose a network with different set of providers for different services. Yes that vision is not fully realised yet, and we don’t have true service function chains. That would be different discussion topic. I tend to agree with Simon, as alternate/interim option we can take hard look whats causing the problems with current VR integration. Personally, I think it would be easier we take a cue from configuration managers and network configuration solutions out there (for e.g promise theory based Cisco ACI) move to more declarative model of expressing desired state of network configuration. Infact current VR from 4.6, actually holds the desired state per service basis, seems to be in that direction. It does make sense to evaluate new appliances which can provide rich semantics (like programmable API, declarative configuration, versioning, commit/rollback etc), but will need significant engineering effort and time to stabilise. We may make same mistakes with integration of other appliance as well, if we fully don’t understand the nature of the current problems with CloudStack core and service provider interaction and current VR integration. On 16/09/16, 11:59 PM, "Simon Weller" wrote: I think our other option is to take a real look at what it would take to fix the VR. In my opinion, a lot of the problems are related to the monolithic python code base and the fact nothing is actually separated. Secondly, the python scripts (and bash scripts) don't use any established libraries to complete tasks and instead shell out and run commands that are both hard to track and hard to parse on return. If we daemonized this, used a real api for Agent to VR communication, used common already existing libraries for the system service and network interactions and spent a bit of time separating out code into distinct modules, everything would behave a lot better. The pain and suffering is due to years and years of patches and constant shelling out to complete tasks in my opinion. If we spend time to rethink how we interact with the VR in general and we abstract the systems and networking stuff and use well known and stable libraries to do the work, the VR would be much easier to maintain. - Si From: Marty Godsey Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 12:24 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Replacing the VR So based upon this discussion would it be prudent to wait on VyOS 2.0? The current VR is giving us issues but would the time invested in another "solution" be wasted especially if by the time another option is chose, then coded, then tested, then implemented and right as that time happened to be when VyOS 2.0 is released. Of course you said they are just in the scoping range so this could still be a year or more out. Thoughts? Regards, Marty Godsey nSource Solutions -Original Message- From: williamstev...
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1677: CLOUDSTACK-8830 - [Vmware] VM snapshot fails for 12 ...
Github user serg38 commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1677 @jburwell Just to add, this is to address changes in backend task processing introduced in ESX 6. In 5.5 and before processing task had always had a name. In 6 it doesn't and competed task is kept in the API queue for exactly 12 min. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1677: CLOUDSTACK-8830 - [Vmware] VM snapshot fails for 12 ...
Github user nvazquez commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1677 @jburwell actually with this small changes vm snapshots can be taken, I already tested manually and succeeds. This problem was related to Vmware API, which sends a task with null name within 12 minutes after vm starts in its recent tasks and if not checked, when iterating through this tasks, NullPointerException caused the whole procedure to fail --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1677: CLOUDSTACK-8830 - [Vmware] VM snapshot fails for 12 ...
Github user jburwell commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1677 @nvazquez this fix appears to get rid of the exception, but I'd like to understand why we can't take a snapshot for exactly 12 minutes after a VM starts. Is a VMware thing or is it a more fundamental CloudStack problem? --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user karuturi commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 Great!! Hopefully, we can merge this by Monday then. This is one of the good PRs we have with good description, screenshots, demo, new tests and test runs by author. (Thanks @mike-tutkowski) --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1659: CLOUDSTACK-9339 Virtual Routers don't handle Multipl...
Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1659 @murali-reddy a Trillian-Jenkins test job (centos7 mgmt + vmware-55u3) has been kicked to run smoke tests --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1659: CLOUDSTACK-9339 Virtual Routers don't handle Multipl...
Github user murali-reddy commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1659 @blueorangutan test --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user jburwell commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 @karuturi discussing with @rhtyd being able to specify a list of additional component tests to blueorgantan on the test command. Hopefully, we can get something together by tomorrow (23 Sept 2016). --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user karuturi commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 That is great. Let us wait for @blueorangutan to post the results. There still is a pending request for 'system VM integration test suites (SSVM, CPVM, and VR)' --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 @jburwell a Trillian-Jenkins matrix job (centos6 mgmt + xs56sp1, centos7 mgmt + vmware55u3, ubuntu mgmt + kvmcentos7) has been kicked to run smoke tests --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user jburwell commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 @mike-tutkowski @karuturi I have asked blueorganutan to test this PR across VMware, KVM, and XenServer (I accidentally told it to all 3). --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user jburwell commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 @blueorangutan test matrix --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1680: CLOUDSTACK-9498: VR CsFile search utility methods fa...
Github user jburwell commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1680 LGTM for code --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1683: fix ping tests to properly recognise successful ping...
Github user jburwell commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1683 @PaulAngus can you open a JIRA ticket for this issue and amend your commit message to reference it? Also, this change would be beneficial to testing the upcoming 4.8.2.0 and 4.9.1.0 releases as well. Could you [change the base branch](https://github.com/blog/2224-change-the-base-branch-of-a-pull-request) of this PR to be 4.8? --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user jburwell commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 @blueorangutan matrix --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064540
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/wrapper/LibvirtModifySshKeysCommandWrapper.java
---
@@ -108,7 +108,7 @@ public Answer execute(final ModifySshKeysCommand
command, final LibvirtComputing
result = "Write file " + sshprvkeypath + ":" +
e.toString();
s_logger.debug(result);
}
-final Script script = new Script("chmod",
libvirtComputingResource.getTimeout(), s_logger);
+final Script script = new Script("chmod",
libvirtComputingResource.getTimeout().getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064208
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java
---
@@ -2377,7 +2378,7 @@ public Type getType() {
}
private Map getVersionStrings() {
-final Script command = new Script(_versionstringpath, _timeout,
s_logger);
+final Script command = new Script(_versionstringpath,
_timeout.getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064306 --- Diff: plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java --- @@ -3197,7 +3198,7 @@ public boolean defaultNetworkRules(final Connect conn, final String vmName, fina final String brname = intf.getBrName(); final String vif = intf.getDevName(); -final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath, _timeout, s_logger); +final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath, _timeout.getMillis(), s_logger); --- End diff -- Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int, Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type conversion. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064254
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java
---
@@ -3150,7 +3151,7 @@ protected long getMemoryFreeInKBs(Domain dm) throws
LibvirtException {
}
private boolean canBridgeFirewall(final String prvNic) {
-final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath, _timeout,
s_logger);
+final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath,
_timeout.getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064380 --- Diff: plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java --- @@ -3300,7 +3301,7 @@ public boolean configureNetworkRulesVMSecondaryIP(final Connect conn, final Stri return false; } -final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath, _timeout, s_logger); +final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath, _timeout.getMillis(), s_logger); --- End diff -- Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int, Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type conversion. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80065874
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/xenserver/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/xenserver/resource/CitrixResourceBase.java
---
@@ -1660,18 +1661,18 @@ public StopAnswer execute(final StopCommand cmd) {
@Override
public ExecutionResult executeInVR(final String routerIP, final String
script, final String args) {
// Timeout is 120 seconds by default
-return executeInVR(routerIP, script, args, 120);
+return executeInVR(routerIP, script, args,
Duration.standardSeconds(120L));
}
@Override
-public ExecutionResult executeInVR(final String routerIP, final String
script, final String args, final int timeout) {
+public ExecutionResult executeInVR(final String routerIP, final String
script, final String args, final Duration timeout) {
Pair result;
String cmdline = "/opt/cloud/bin/router_proxy.sh " + script + " "
+ routerIP + " " + args;
// semicolon need to be escape for bash
cmdline = cmdline.replaceAll(";", ";");
try {
s_logger.debug("Executing command in VR: " + cmdline);
-result = SshHelper.sshExecute(_host.getIp(), 22, _username,
null, _password.peek(), cmdline, 6, 6, timeout * 1000);
+result = SshHelper.sshExecute(_host.getIp(), 22, _username,
null, _password.peek(), cmdline, 6, 6, (int)timeout.getMillis());
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the
`SshHelper.sshExecute(String, int, String, String, ??, String, int, int, int)`
method that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064404
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java
---
@@ -3317,7 +3318,7 @@ public boolean cleanupRules() {
if (!_canBridgeFirewall) {
return false;
}
-final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath, _timeout,
s_logger);
+final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath,
_timeout.getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064168
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java
---
@@ -1319,7 +1320,7 @@ public Answer executeRequest(final Command cmd) {
public synchronized boolean destroyTunnelNetwork(final String bridge) {
findOrCreateTunnelNetwork(bridge);
-final Script cmd = new Script(_ovsTunnelPath, _timeout, s_logger);
+final Script cmd = new Script(_ovsTunnelPath,
_timeout.getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064103
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java
---
@@ -1226,7 +1227,7 @@ private boolean checkOvsNetwork(final String
networkName) {
return true;
}
-final Script command = new Script("/bin/sh", _timeout);
+final Script command = new Script("/bin/sh", _timeout.getMillis());
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int)`
constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80062812
--- Diff:
core/src/com/cloud/agent/resource/virtualnetwork/VirtualRoutingResource.java ---
@@ -374,9 +375,9 @@ private Answer execute(AggregationControlCommand cmd) {
FileConfigItem fileConfigItem = new
FileConfigItem(VRScripts.CONFIG_CACHE_LOCATION, cfgFileName, sb.toString());
ScriptConfigItem scriptConfigItem = new
ScriptConfigItem(VRScripts.VR_CFG, "-c " + VRScripts.CONFIG_CACHE_LOCATION +
cfgFileName);
// 120s is the minimal timeout
-int timeout = answerCounts * _eachTimeout;
-if (timeout < 120) {
-timeout = 120;
+Duration timeout = Duration.standardSeconds(answerCounts *
_eachTimeout.getStandardSeconds());
+if (timeout.getStandardSeconds() < 120L) {
--- End diff --
Please consider extract ``120L`` to a constant of type ``Duration`` to
intent more clear and provide further unit conversion safety (e.g.
MINIMUM_VR_RESTART_TIMEOUT).
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064229
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java
---
@@ -2973,7 +2974,7 @@ public Domain getDomain(final Connect conn, final
String vmName) throws LibvirtE
}
private String executeBashScript(final String script) {
-final Script command = new Script("/bin/bash", _timeout, s_logger);
+final Script command = new Script("/bin/bash",
_timeout.getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064464
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/wrapper/LibvirtModifySshKeysCommandWrapper.java
---
@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ public Answer execute(final ModifySshKeysCommand command,
final LibvirtComputing
String result = null;
if (!sshKeysDir.exists()) {
// Change permissions for the 700
-final Script script = new Script("mkdir",
libvirtComputingResource.getTimeout(), s_logger);
+final Script script = new Script("mkdir",
libvirtComputingResource.getTimeout().getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064873
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/wrapper/LibvirtPvlanSetupCommandWrapper.java
---
@@ -58,11 +59,11 @@ public Answer execute(final PvlanSetupCommand command,
final LibvirtComputingRes
String result = null;
try {
final String guestBridgeName =
libvirtComputingResource.getGuestBridgeName();
-final int timeout = libvirtComputingResource.getTimeout();
+final Duration timeout = libvirtComputingResource.getTimeout();
if (command.getType() == PvlanSetupCommand.Type.DHCP) {
final String ovsPvlanDhcpHostPath =
libvirtComputingResource.getOvsPvlanDhcpHostPath();
-final Script script = new Script(ovsPvlanDhcpHostPath,
timeout, s_logger);
+final Script script = new Script(ovsPvlanDhcpHostPath,
timeout.getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064597
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/wrapper/LibvirtOvsCreateTunnelCommandWrapper.java
---
@@ -40,14 +40,11 @@ public Answer execute(final OvsCreateTunnelCommand
command, final LibvirtComputi
try {
if
(!libvirtComputingResource.findOrCreateTunnelNetwork(bridge)) {
s_logger.debug("Error during bridge setup");
-return new OvsCreateTunnelAnswer(command, false,
-"Cannot create network", bridge);
+return new OvsCreateTunnelAnswer(command, false, "Cannot
create network", bridge);
}
-
libvirtComputingResource.configureTunnelNetwork(command.getNetworkId(),
command.getFrom(),
-command.getNetworkName());
-
-final Script scriptCommand = new
Script(libvirtComputingResource.getOvsTunnelPath(),
libvirtComputingResource.getTimeout(), s_logger);
+
libvirtComputingResource.configureTunnelNetwork(command.getNetworkId(),
command.getFrom(), command.getNetworkName());
+final Script scriptCommand = new
Script(libvirtComputingResource.getOvsTunnelPath(),
libvirtComputingResource.getTimeout().getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80065801
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/vmware/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/vmware/resource/VmwareResource.java
---
@@ -1280,7 +1281,7 @@ public ExecutionResult executeInVR(String routerIP,
String script, String args,
try {
VmwareManager mgr =
getServiceContext().getStockObject(VmwareManager.CONTEXT_STOCK_NAME);
result = SshHelper.sshExecute(routerIP, DefaultDomRSshPort,
"root", mgr.getSystemVMKeyFile(), null, "/opt/cloud/bin/" + script + " " + args,
-6, 6, timeout * 1000);
+6, 6, (int)timeout.getMillis());
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the
`SshHelper.sshExecute(String, int, String, String, ??, String, int, int, int)`
method that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064723 --- Diff: plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/wrapper/LibvirtOvsDestroyTunnelCommandWrapper.java --- @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ public Answer execute(final OvsDestroyTunnelCommand command, final LibvirtComput return new Answer(command, false, "No network found"); } -final Script scriptCommand = new Script(libvirtComputingResource.getOvsTunnelPath(), libvirtComputingResource.getTimeout(), s_logger); +final Script scriptCommand = new Script(libvirtComputingResource.getOvsTunnelPath(), libvirtComputingResource.getTimeout().getMillis(), s_logger); --- End diff -- Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int, Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type conversion. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80065456
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/vmware/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/vmware/resource/VmwareResource.java
---
@@ -1265,11 +1266,11 @@ private ExecutionResult
prepareNetworkElementCommand(IpAssocCommand cmd) {
@Override
public ExecutionResult executeInVR(String routerIP, String script,
String args) {
-return executeInVR(routerIP, script, args, 120);
+return executeInVR(routerIP, script, args,
Duration.standardSeconds(120L));
--- End diff --
Please consider extracting ``Duration.standardSeconds(120L)`` to a constant
to clarify intent
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80065183 --- Diff: plugins/hypervisors/ovm3/src/main/java/com/cloud/hypervisor/ovm3/resources/Ovm3VirtualRoutingResource.java --- @@ -38,7 +40,7 @@ private final Logger logger = Logger .getLogger(Ovm3VirtualRoutingResource.class); private String domRCloudPath = "/opt/cloud/bin/"; -private int vrTimeout = 600; +private Duration vrTimeout = Duration.standardSeconds(600L); --- End diff -- Please consider extracting ``Duration.standardSeconds(600L)`` to constant to clarify the intent. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064319 --- Diff: plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java --- @@ -3229,7 +3230,7 @@ protected boolean post_default_network_rules(final Connect conn, final String vm final String brname = intf.getBrName(); final String vif = intf.getDevName(); -final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath, _timeout, s_logger); +final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath, _timeout.getMillis(), s_logger); --- End diff -- Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int, Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type conversion. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064432
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java
---
@@ -3327,7 +3328,7 @@ public boolean cleanupRules() {
}
public String getRuleLogsForVms() {
-final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath, _timeout,
s_logger);
+final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath,
_timeout.getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064905
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/wrapper/LibvirtPvlanSetupCommandWrapper.java
---
@@ -87,7 +88,7 @@ public Answer execute(final PvlanSetupCommand command,
final LibvirtComputingRes
} else if (command.getType() == PvlanSetupCommand.Type.VM) {
final String ovsPvlanVmPath =
libvirtComputingResource.getOvsPvlanVmPath();
-final Script script = new Script(ovsPvlanVmPath, timeout,
s_logger);
+final Script script = new Script(ovsPvlanVmPath,
timeout.getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064777
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/wrapper/LibvirtOvsVpcPhysicalTopologyConfigCommandWrapper.java
---
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
@Override
public Answer execute(final OvsVpcPhysicalTopologyConfigCommand
command, final LibvirtComputingResource libvirtComputingResource) {
try {
-final Script scriptCommand = new
Script(libvirtComputingResource.getOvsTunnelPath(),
libvirtComputingResource.getTimeout(), s_logger);
+final Script scriptCommand = new
Script(libvirtComputingResource.getOvsTunnelPath(),
libvirtComputingResource.getTimeout().getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064807
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/wrapper/LibvirtOvsVpcRoutingPolicyConfigCommandWrapper.java
---
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
@Override
public Answer execute(final OvsVpcRoutingPolicyConfigCommand command,
final LibvirtComputingResource libvirtComputingResource) {
try {
-final Script scriptCommand = new
Script(libvirtComputingResource.getOvsTunnelPath(),
libvirtComputingResource.getTimeout(), s_logger);
+final Script scriptCommand = new
Script(libvirtComputingResource.getOvsTunnelPath(),
libvirtComputingResource.getTimeout().getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80063605
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/hyperv/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/hyperv/resource/HypervDirectConnectResource.java
---
@@ -636,7 +637,7 @@ public ExecutionResult executeInVR(final String
routerIP, final String script, f
try {
result = SshHelper.sshExecute(routerIP, DEFAULT_DOMR_SSHPORT,
"root", getSystemVMKeyFile(), null, "/opt/cloud/bin/" + script + " " + args,
-6, 6, timeout * 1000);
+6, 6, (int)timeout.getMillis());
--- End diff --
Please consider defining an override of the ``SshHelper.sshExecute`` method
that accepts a ``Duration`` in order to encapsulate this conversion. We should
also consider deprecating the version that accepts ``int``.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064364
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java
---
@@ -3273,7 +3274,7 @@ public boolean addNetworkRules(final String vmName,
final String vmId, final Str
}
final String newRules = rules.replace(" ", ";");
-final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath, _timeout,
s_logger);
+final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath,
_timeout.getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064180
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java
---
@@ -1373,7 +1374,7 @@ public synchronized boolean
configureTunnelNetwork(final long networkId,
}
}
if (!configured) {
-final Script cmd = new Script(_ovsTunnelPath, _timeout,
s_logger);
+final Script cmd = new Script(_ovsTunnelPath,
_timeout.getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80063935
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java
---
@@ -279,12 +280,12 @@
@Override
public ExecutionResult executeInVR(final String routerIp, final String
script, final String args) {
-return executeInVR(routerIp, script, args, _timeout / 1000);
+return executeInVR(routerIp, script, args, _timeout);
}
@Override
-public ExecutionResult executeInVR(final String routerIp, final String
script, final String args, final int timeout) {
-final Script command = new Script(_routerProxyPath, timeout *
1000, s_logger);
+public ExecutionResult executeInVR(final String routerIp, final String
script, final String args, final Duration milli) {
+final Script command = new Script(_routerProxyPath,
milli.getMillis(), s_logger);
--- End diff --
Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int,
Logger)` constructor that accepts a `Duration` instance to encapsulate this
conversion.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064278 --- Diff: plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java --- @@ -3170,7 +3171,7 @@ public boolean destroyNetworkRulesForVM(final Connect conn, final String vmName) final InterfaceDef intf = intfs.get(0); vif = intf.getDevName(); } -final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath, _timeout, s_logger); +final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath, _timeout.getMillis(), s_logger); --- End diff -- Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int, Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type conversion. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80061842
--- Diff:
core/src/com/cloud/agent/resource/virtualnetwork/VirtualRoutingResource.java ---
@@ -374,9 +375,9 @@ private Answer execute(AggregationControlCommand cmd) {
FileConfigItem fileConfigItem = new
FileConfigItem(VRScripts.CONFIG_CACHE_LOCATION, cfgFileName, sb.toString());
ScriptConfigItem scriptConfigItem = new
ScriptConfigItem(VRScripts.VR_CFG, "-c " + VRScripts.CONFIG_CACHE_LOCATION +
cfgFileName);
// 120s is the minimal timeout
-int timeout = answerCounts * _eachTimeout;
-if (timeout < 120) {
-timeout = 120;
+Duration timeout = Duration.standardSeconds(answerCounts *
_eachTimeout.getStandardSeconds());
--- End diff --
To avoid any potential unit conversion issues, consider using the
``Duration. multipliedBy(int)` method.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80064346 --- Diff: plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java --- @@ -3255,7 +3256,7 @@ public boolean configureDefaultNetworkRulesForSystemVm(final Connect conn, final return false; } -final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath, _timeout, s_logger); +final Script cmd = new Script(_securityGroupPath, _timeout.getMillis(), s_logger); --- End diff -- Please consider adding an overridden version of the `Script(String, int, Logger)` constructor that accepts `Duration` to encapsulate this type conversion. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1678: CLOUDSTACK-9503: Increased the VR script time...
Github user jburwell commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1678#discussion_r80062899
--- Diff:
core/src/com/cloud/agent/resource/virtualnetwork/VirtualRoutingResource.java ---
@@ -374,9 +375,9 @@ private Answer execute(AggregationControlCommand cmd) {
FileConfigItem fileConfigItem = new
FileConfigItem(VRScripts.CONFIG_CACHE_LOCATION, cfgFileName, sb.toString());
ScriptConfigItem scriptConfigItem = new
ScriptConfigItem(VRScripts.VR_CFG, "-c " + VRScripts.CONFIG_CACHE_LOCATION +
cfgFileName);
// 120s is the minimal timeout
-int timeout = answerCounts * _eachTimeout;
-if (timeout < 120) {
-timeout = 120;
+Duration timeout = Duration.standardSeconds(answerCounts *
_eachTimeout.getStandardSeconds());
+if (timeout.getStandardSeconds() < 120L) {
+timeout = Duration.standardSeconds(120L);
--- End diff --
Consider using the previously defined constant here for ensured consistency
between he check and the value used.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user karuturi commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 @jburwell I never asked you to remove your -1. I am not even trying to convince you to remove your -1. If Vmware + nfs is such an important combination, it should be the prerequisite for every PR not just this one. I do understand the necessity of quality(which why we started with PRs in the first place) and all that is said makes sense in an ideal(or atleast corporate) world. There is lot of difference between being technically 'hard' and monetarily 'hard'. Quality is not going to improve by just waiting on test results. It will only improve if we make such an effort to run tests. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user mike-tutkowski commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 @jburwell Let me run those tests next week (probably Monday) as I'm just about ready to head out on a flight to a customer site for an upcoming meeting and won't be back until the weekend. Thanks --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
Speakers announced for Cloudstack EU User Group
We're very excited to announce the Autumn 2016 meeting of the CloudStack European User group, this time kindly hosted by BT, the people behind BT Cloud Compute. Would be great to see as many from the community there as possible. Folks who cant make it, would appreciate if you're able to tweet and share with your networks https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/cloudstack-european-user-group-tickets-27604537916 CloudStack European User Group VENUE: BT Centre showcase, 81 Newgate St, London, EC1A 7AJ. Nearest tube: St. Paul's As well as talks from guest speakers, there will be the chance to meet with other CloudStack users, lunch, and time to continue the discussions over a beer or two in the evening. IMPORTANT NOTE: these user groups are regularly sold out and we've had a waiting list for places. Please ensure you are able to attend before booking tickets. AGENDA & SPEAKERS Fast, automated landscape provisioning based on CloudStack, Ingo Jochim & Andre Walter. Ingo and Andre will talk about their experiences deploying CloudStack as a platform for fast and flexible SAP system provisioning. Focused on relevant examples, they will highlight lessons learnt, technologies used and integration with CloudStack. Application Supply Chain Automation (AsA) by Govind Rangasamy. Organizations today are struggling to transform their mission critical systems into hyper-scale and highly available services, while also accelerating new application rollouts. Enterprises and MSPs rely on Appranix's AsA to accelerate application delivery and eliminate waste by composing, automating and operating applications with data fabric and cloud services along the application supply chain. Govind will talk about how CloudStack customers can take advantage of this unique approach and technology in details. Building an Infrastructure as a Service for Voice platform, Len Bellemore & Tulio de Souza. As a major Mitel phone system integrator and reseller, we wanted to host Unified Communications platforms in a pay-as-you-go consumption model. We chose Cloudstack, and transformed our IaaS cloud into an IaaS for Voice platform integrated into our Core Network. With a custom UI, that calls the Cloudstack API, we have reduced deployment times, as well as the number of engineers involved in a phone system deployment. We'll talk about some of the challenges, wins, and how this very successful project has made us fall in love with Cloudstack again. Creating a native Containers as a Service (CaaS) offering on CloudStack, Paul Angus. Cloud native applications running in containerised environments look set to create a paradigm shift in the way compute resources are consumed. However, this presents challenges (both technical and business) to Cloud Service providers who have already invested heavily in Infrastructure as a Service offerings based on the virtual machine model. Paul will discuss these challenges, look at the services that end-users will demand in a containerised world and how major public cloud providers have overcome these challenges. He will then preview an exciting new project that gives a simple method for operators to deploy Containers as a Service to their end-users, based on Apache CloudStack https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/cloudstack-european-user-group-tickets-27604537916 Kind Regards Giles giles.sir...@shapeblue.com www.shapeblue.com 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1593: CLOUDSTACK-9417: Usage module refactoring
Github user serg38 commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593 @rafaelweingartner In usage_evant_details there will be never details with event_id=0 so there will be no conflict ever if we do it this way. Based on the code there are some details e.g. CPU speed that might be saved to details table at some point but they are always tied to respective event_id which is greater then 0 for normal events. Event id=0 can be considered system and generated by Sanity job. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1593: CLOUDSTACK-9417: Usage module refactoring
Github user rafaelweingartner commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593 I understand why you want to use something that already exists, instead of creating a new table/DAO/service class. Isnât this table (event_details) used for anything else? If it is something that is already out there and is not being used, I have nothing against using it. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1593: CLOUDSTACK-9417: Usage module refactoring
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
@rhtyd @jburwell @rafaelweingartner Can we use event_details table which
is not used at the moment? if we consider sanity job to generate event_id=0
then max_id can be easily represented there as ("id","0","max_id","value")
Alternatively a new table would require new DAO isn't it? Seems to be huge
scope creep for such a minor fix as permission issue. Can we just merge it as
it is and open another PR for the extended scope?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
Re: State of IPv6 implementation
> Op 21 september 2016 om 18:30 schreef Thomas Schneider > : > > > Hi, > > Basicaly I have a plan to implement IPv6 in advanced zone with ospf or > bgp routing based on this doc with some improvement: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/IPv6+in+VPC+Router > > The first thing I will do, is to test my setup by running script manualy > on the virtual router, and organizing the data about ipv6. > Once that will be OK, I wloud try to impment the fonctions in the code. > Cool, good to hear. > I have skills in coding, but if somone can help me to start with the > cloudstack code it will be cool. > Well, that is a problem. The core is really very, very much IPv4 focused. That needs to be fixed prior to any IPv6 code. In Basic Networking it is easier, but advanced is a whole different story. My Advanced Networking knowledge is also very limited, so I can't tell exactly. Wido > *Thomas Schneider* > Euskill SAS > > Le 21/09/2016 à 15:30, Nux! a écrit : > > You guys should get in touch with Exoscale, I think they made progress with > > IPv6 in SG zones. > > > > Lucian > > > > -- > > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology! > > > > Nux! > > www.nux.ro > > > > - Original Message - > >> From: "Wido den Hollander" > >> To: "Thomas Schneider" , > >> dev@cloudstack.apache.org > >> Sent: Wednesday, 21 September, 2016 10:52:03 > >> Subject: Re: State of IPv6 implementation > > > >>> Op 20 september 2016 om 23:10 schreef Thomas Schneider > >>> : > >>> > >>> > >>> Hi Everybody > >>> > >>> I would like to know what is the state of IPv6 implementation in > >>> Cloudstack. > >>> > >> > >> Stuff didn't really advance yet. Are you looking into Basic or Advanced > >> Networking? > >> > >>> I have good skills in IPv6 and routing and I would like to contribute to > >>> the project. > >>> > >>> If somebody can tell me how to start ? > >> > >> The core of CloudStack is still very, very much IPv4 minded and it will be > >> a lot > >> of work to get this in there. > >> > >> You might want to read this: > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/IPv6+in+Basic+Networking > >> > >> Wido > >> > >>> Regards > >>> > >>> -- > >>> *Thomas Schneider* > >>> Euskill SAS
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1593: CLOUDSTACK-9417: Usage module refactoring
Github user rhtyd commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593 @serg38 since we don't have a general key/value store table, we may need to create a new table in `cloud_usage` db. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user jburwell commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 @mike-tutkowski I only see results for the new test suites for XenServer + Managed Storage. Have you also run the entire smoke test suite with `require_hardware` set to `true`? If so, could you please add the test results to the PR? --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user jburwell commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 @karuturi I am not going to debate the commonality of VMware. It is the market leader in the hypervisor space, and NFS is one of the most popular storage protocols used with it. Like the general hypervisor market, we have a large portion of our user community that relies on VMware with NFS. Therefore, I will not remove my -1 from this PR until the necessary regression tests have been run. Generally speaking, quality is the primary driver for merging PRs. Selective test coverage (both in the number of tests run and diversity of environments tests are run against) is one of the largest quality issues we are currently working to address. A test scenario being "hard" is not a valid reason to ignore it and move a PR forward. Given that quality is the primary driver for the community, then PRs must wait to be adequately tested. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user karuturi commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 @jburwell 'most commonly deployed' - I doubt. As @blueorangutan is ready to test, we can wait. In general, waiting for test results on a configuration which no one has(Hardware is hard), just halts a PR with no further steps to do. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1642: CLOUDSTACK-9504: System VMs on Managed Storage
Github user jburwell commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1642 @karuturi VMware with NFS primary/secondary storage. It is one of the most commonly deployed CloudStack configurations. Therefore, I am -1 on merging this PR until this regression test is performed. The good news is that blueorgangutan is now back online and will be able to run such a test shortly. @rhtyd is working to address a VMware Ansible/Marvin bug. We will kick a CentOS 7.2/VMware 5.5u3 smoke test/integration test run for this PR when it is ready. I expect that it will addressed today (22 Sept 2016). --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1545: CLOUDSTACK-8715: Add channel to Instances for Qemu G...
Github user wido commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1545 @jburwell The old systemVM will also work, but that assumes it's serial port is *always* the first port attached. The XML we generate will make sure that the Qemu Guest Agent port is the second one, so the old SSVM template will still work. I run this patch in production with 4.9 without a modified SSVM, works fine. The changes in the SSVM are just there to make it more robust against such changes. --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1638: CLOUDSTACK-9456: Migrate master to Spring 4.x
Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1638 @rhtyd a Trillian-Jenkins test job (centos7 mgmt + vmware-55u3) has been kicked to run smoke tests --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1638: CLOUDSTACK-9456: Migrate master to Spring 4.x
Github user rhtyd commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1638 @blueorangutan test centos7 vmware-55u3 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1682: IGNORE this PR
Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1682 @rhtyd a Trillian-Jenkins matrix job (centos6 mgmt + xs56sp1, centos7 mgmt + vmware55u3, ubuntu mgmt + kvmcentos7) has been kicked to run smoke tests --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1682: IGNORE this PR
Github user rhtyd commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1682 @blueorangutan test matrix --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1682: IGNORE this PR
Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1682 @rhtyd a Trillian-Jenkins test job (centos7 mgmt + vmware-55u3) has been kicked to run smoke tests against packages at http://packages.shapeblue.com/cloudstack/pr/1682 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1682: IGNORE this PR
Github user rhtyd commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1682 @blueorangutan test --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack pull request #1682: IGNORE this PR
Github user rhtyd closed the pull request at: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1682 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
[GitHub] cloudstack issue #1682: IGNORE this PR
Github user blueorangutan commented on the issue: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1682 Trillian smoketest result (#) Hypervisor: kvm (x2) Network type: Advanced Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/trillian-19-kvm-cs410.zip Test completed. 49 look ok, 4 have errors Test | Result | Time (s) --- | --- | --- test_isolate_network_password_server | `Failure` | 90.686 test_04_rvpc_privategw_static_routes | `Failure` | 157.803 test_03_vpc_privategw_restart_vpc_cleanup | `Failure` | 96.899 test_02_vpc_privategw_static_routes | `Failure` | 81.847 test_01_vpc_privategw_acl | `Failure` | 51.507 test_router_dhcphosts | `Error` | 823.283 test_01_vpc_remote_access_vpn | `Error` | 0.074 ContextSuite context=TestRouterDHCPHosts>:teardown | `Error` | 874.517 test_network_acl | Success | 75.920 test_05_rvpc_multi_tiers | Success | 443.256 test_04_rvpc_network_garbage_collector_nics | Success | 792.190 test_04_rvpc_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces | Success | 233.263 test_03_vpc_internallb_haproxy_stats_on_all_interfaces | Success | 177.953 test_03_create_redundant_VPC_1tier_2VMs_2IPs_2PF_ACL_reboot_routers | Success | 469.464 test_03_RVR_Network_check_router_state | Success | 252.395 test_02_redundant_VPC_default_routes | Success | 493.688 test_02_isolate_network_FW_PF_default_routes_egress_false | Success | 236.680 test_02_internallb_roundrobin_1RVPC_3VM_HTTP_port80 | Success | 515.308 test_02_VPC_default_routes | Success | 284.319 test_02_RVR_Network_FW_PF_SSH_default_routes_egress_false | Success | 269.897 test_01_vpc_site2site_vpn | Success | 160.766 test_01_redundant_vpc_site2site_vpn | Success | 230.337 test_01_isolate_network_FW_PF_default_routes_egress_true | Success | 196.616 test_01_internallb_roundrobin_1VPC_3VM_HTTP_port80 | Success | 424.778 test_01_create_redundant_VPC_2tiers_4VMs_4IPs_4PF_ACL | Success | 1033.463 test_01_VPC_nics_after_destroy | Success | 553.071 test_01_RVR_Network_FW_PF_SSH_default_routes_egress_true | Success | 257.057 --- If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket with INFRA. ---
