Re: DISCUSS : Vmware to Cloudstack migration support

[Simon Weller]

We're actively working on migrations as well. We submitted a PR recently to 
support specifying a mac address on an interface to ease migration pain.


https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2143




From: williamstev...@gmail.com  on behalf of Will 
Stevens 
Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2017 9:15 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: us...@cloudstack.apache.org; Vinay Patil; Siddheshwar More
Subject: Re: DISCUSS : Vmware to Cloudstack migration support

If you are going from VMware to CloudStack Managed VMware, this is
something I have done quite a bit.  I even built a tool to do this:
https://github.com/swill/migrate2cs
[https://avatars4.githubusercontent.com/u/13644?v=4=400]

swill/migrate2cs
github.com
Contribute to migrate2cs development by creating an account on GitHub.




This is not a polished product.  Well, it is pretty polished once you get
it setup, but the setup is a bit complicated to get started.

If you would like to use it, let me know and I will do what I can to get
you setup.

*Will Stevens*
CTO


CloudOps | Managed Private Cloud | Managed Public Cloud | Cloud Building | 
Cloud Architecture | Cloud Migration
goo.gl
We provide private, public and hybrid cloud solutions for businesses seeking to 
scale, and for enterprises making their move to the Cloud.




On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 9:52 AM, Shreya Nair  wrote:

> Hello,
>
> *An update to the migration task:*
>
> We have installed Cloudstack onto a vm on VMware to work around the
> cross-hypervisor migration issue. Now the underlying hypervisor would be
> the ESXi server for both setups (VMware and Cloudstack).
>
> Currently, we create the corresponding equivalent infrastructure on
> CloudStack wrt vmware setup.  We create a zone, pod, cluster and host set
> up with the underlying network infrastructure. However, while setting up
> the storage (Primary storage at cluster-wide scope and Secondary storage at
> zone-wide) the documentation mentions the following warnings:
>
>
>- *Primary storage warning:*
>   - When using preallocated storage for primary storage, be sure there
>   is nothing on the storage (ex. you have an empty SAN volume or
> an empty NFS
>   share). Adding the storage to CloudStack will destroy any existing
> data.
>- *Secondary storage warning:*
>   - Ensure that nothing is stored on the server. Adding the server to
>   CloudStack will destroy any existing data.
>
>
> We have obtained the mysql dump of the datastore of the source VM on
> VMware. The datastore, as you may be aware, is a logical container that
> holds virtual machine files and other files necessary for VM operations. As
> such, it may be logically mapped to the Secondary storage setup in the
> CloudStack infrastructure.
>
> Would it be possible to use the mysql dump from source to update the
> Secondary storage?
>
> Thanks & Regards,
>
> Shreya
>
> On Fri, Jul 7, 2017 at 4:04 PM, Paul Angus 
> wrote:
>
> > Maybe you should try qemu-img instead.
> >
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Paul Angus
> >
> >
> > paul.an...@shapeblue.com
> > www.shapeblue.com
[http://www.shapeblue.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/logo.png]

Shapeblue - The CloudStack Company
www.shapeblue.com
Rapid deployment framework for Apache CloudStack IaaS Clouds. CSForge is a 
framework developed by ShapeBlue to deliver the rapid deployment of a 
standardised ...



> > 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
> > @shapeblue
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Shreya Nair [mailto:shreya.n...@opcito.com]
> > Sent: 07 July 2017 11:30
> > To: us...@cloudstack.apache.org; dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> > Cc: Vinay Patil ; Siddheshwar More <
> > siddheshwar.m...@opcito.com>
> > Subject: Re: DISCUSS : Vmware to Cloudstack migration support
> >
> > Hi Paul,
> > We explored the XenConvert solution. The XenConvert utility has been
> > retired from XenServer 6.2 and upward. So the only solution would be
> using
> > an old copy or trial version of Xen Conversion Manager.
> >
> > Instead of the qemu-img utility, we used the VirtualBox VBoxManage.exe to
> > support conversion of *.VMDK file to VHD. This VHD file was used to
> create
> > a CS template and create an instance. However, the VM was unable to mount
> > the drives as it was unable to find xvdXX partitions
> >
> >
> > I get the following error on CS instance on boot:
> > [Inline image 2]
> >
> > and the logs shows us this:
> >
> > You might have to change the root from /dev/hd[a-d] to /dev/xvd[a-d]
> >
> >
> >
> > However, on using lsblk command on the source vmware instance, we
> realized
> > that the partitions on SCSI storage devices (Used by vmware) are named as
> > /dev/sdXX 

Re: [DISCUSS] CloudStack 4.9.3.0 (LTS)

[Rohit Yadav]

Lotic,


The specific PR has been merged on 4.9 branch and will make its way to future 
4.9.3.0 release.


- Rohit


From: Lotic Lists 
Sent: 13 July 2017 17:47:36
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] CloudStack 4.9.3.0 (LTS)

Hi Rohit.

I would suggest the 1829 [1]

It's a big problem with XenServer and more than 2 datadisks attached per VM 
(HVM)

[1] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1829


rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com 
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue
  
 


-Original Message-
From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com]
Sent: quarta-feira, 12 de julho de 2017 11:42
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org; us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] CloudStack 4.9.3.0 (LTS)

All,


Please send me a list of PRs you would like to see in 4.9.3.0 so we can freeze 
the scope for 4.9.3.0, no promises but it may be possible to have a release 
plan as soon as next week.


- Rohit


From: Wido den Hollander 
Sent: 12 July 2017 01:27:30
To: Rohit Yadav; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; us...@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] CloudStack 4.9.3.0 (LTS)

Hi,

I would suggest: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2131

Serious issue with Ubuntu 16.04 and statistics gathering on KVM.

Wido

> Op 11 juli 2017 om 11:49 schreef Rohit Yadav :
>
>
> Hi Sean,
>
>
> Thanks for sharing.
>
>
> - Rohit
>
> 
> From: Sean Lair 
> Sent: 11 July 2017 03:41:17
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] CloudStack 4.9.3.0 (LTS)
>
> Here are three issues we ran into in 4.9.2.0.  We have been running all of 
> these fixes for several months without issues.  The code changes are all very 
> easy/small, but had a big impact for us.
>
> I'd respectfully suggest they go into 4.9.3.0:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2041 (VR related jobs
> scheduled and run twice on mgmt servers)
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2040 (Bug in monitoring of
> S2S VPNs - also exists in 4.10)
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1966 (IPSEC VPNs do not work
> after vRouter reboot)
>
> Thanks
> Sean
>
> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Rohit Yadav [mailto:rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 7, 2017 1:14 AM
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: us...@cloudstack.apache.org
> Subject: [DISCUSS] CloudStack 4.9.3.0 (LTS)
>
> All,
>
>
> With 4.10.0.0 voted, I would like to start some initial discussion around the 
> next minor LTS release 4.9.3.0. At the moment I don't have a timeline, plans 
> or dates to share but I would like to engage with the community to gather 
> list of issues, commits, PRs that we should consider for the next LTS release 
> 4.9.3.0.
>
>
> To reduce our test and QA scope, we don't want to consider changes that are 
> new feature, or enhancements but strictly blockers/critical/major bugfixes 
> and security related fixes, and we can consider reverting any already 
> committed/merged PR(s) on 4.9 branch (committed since 4.9.2.0).
>
>
> Please go through list of commits since 4.9.2.0 (you can also run, git log 
> 4.9.2.0..4.9) and let us know if there is any change we should consider 
> reverting:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commits/4.9
>
>
> I started backporting some 
> fixes on the 4.9 branch, please go through the following PR and raise 
> objections on changes/commits that we should not backport or revert:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2052
>
>
> Lastly, please also share any PRs that we should consider reviewing+merging 
> on 4.9 branch for the 4.9.3.0 release effort.
>
>
> - Rohit
>
> rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> www.shapeblue.com
> 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK @shapeblue
>
>
>

rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
www.shapeblue.com
53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
@shapeblue