[Engine-devel] fail to setup engine
Hi, We cannot setup engine based on today's source code, any ideas? $HOME/ovirt-engine/bin/engine-setup-2 [ ERROR ] Failed to execute stage 'Booting': 5 [ INFO ] Stage: Initializing Setup was run under unprivileged user this will produce development installation do you wish to proceed? (Yes, No) [No]: Yes [WARNING] engine-setup-2 is a technical preview, and yet to include all functionality that exists in legacy engine-setup. Specifically, engine-setup-2 does not support upgrade from previous installations. Best Regards, Dave Chen smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine
Il 03/07/2013 10:54, Chen, Wei D ha scritto: Hi, We cannot setup engine based on today's source code, any ideas? $HOME/ovirt-engine/bin/engine-setup-2 [ ERROR ] Failed to execute stage 'Booting': 5 [ INFO ] Stage: Initializing Setup was run under unprivileged user this will produce development installation do you wish to proceed? (Yes, No) [No]: Yes [WARNING] engine-setup-2 is a technical preview, and yet to include all functionality that exists in legacy engine-setup. Specifically, engine-setup-2 does not support upgrade from previous installations. Best Regards, Dave Chen ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel Can you attach the log file? -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine
If the setup log is not created (it's usually in tmp directory) can you attach the output of OTOPI_DEBUG=1 $HOME/ovirt-engine/bin/engine-setup-2 ? Il 03/07/2013 10:59, Chen, Wei D ha scritto: where is the log file? engine.log and server.log have not created yet. Best Regards, Dave Chen From: Sandro Bonazzola [mailto:sbona...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 4:58 PM To: Chen, Wei D Cc: engine-devel; Zhang, Lijuan; Liu, DanqingX Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine Il 03/07/2013 10:54, Chen, Wei D ha scritto: Hi, We cannot setup engine based on today's source code, any ideas? $HOME/ovirt-engine/bin/engine-setup-2 [ ERROR ] Failed to execute stage 'Booting': 5 [ INFO ] Stage: Initializing Setup was run under unprivileged user this will produce development installation do you wish to proceed? (Yes, No) [No]: Yes [WARNING] engine-setup-2 is a technical preview, and yet to include all functionality that exists in legacy engine-setup. Specifically, engine-setup-2 does not support upgrade from previous installations. Best Regards, Dave Chen ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel Can you attach the log file? -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine
Setup was run under unprivileged user this will produce development installation do you wish to proceed? (Yes, No) [No]: No You aborted the setup answering no. Il 03/07/2013 11:23, Liu, DanqingX ha scritto: This attachment is the log -Original Message- From: Sandro Bonazzola [mailto:sbona...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:08 PM To: Chen, Wei D Cc: engine-devel; Zhang, Lijuan; Liu, DanqingX Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine If the setup log is not created (it's usually in tmp directory) can you attach the output of OTOPI_DEBUG=1 $HOME/ovirt-engine/bin/engine-setup-2 ? Il 03/07/2013 10:59, Chen, Wei D ha scritto: where is the log file? engine.log and server.log have not created yet. Best Regards, Dave Chen From: Sandro Bonazzola [mailto:sbona...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 4:58 PM To: Chen, Wei D Cc: engine-devel; Zhang, Lijuan; Liu, DanqingX Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine Il 03/07/2013 10:54, Chen, Wei D ha scritto: Hi, We cannot setup engine based on today's source code, any ideas? $HOME/ovirt-engine/bin/engine-setup-2 [ ERROR ] Failed to execute stage 'Booting': 5 [ INFO ] Stage: Initializing Setup was run under unprivileged user this will produce development installation do you wish to proceed? (Yes, No) [No]: Yes [WARNING] engine-setup-2 is a technical preview, and yet to include all functionality that exists in legacy engine-setup. Specifically, engine-setup-2 does not support upgrade from previous installations. Best Regards, Dave Chen ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel Can you attach the log file? -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine
I have not performed this operation. We have tried to setup both on fedora 18 and fedora 19, fedora 18 failed to setup while fedora 19 can setup successfully. Best Regards, Dave Chen -Original Message- From: Sandro Bonazzola [mailto:sbona...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:39 PM To: Liu, DanqingX Cc: Chen, Wei D; engine-devel; Zhang, Lijuan Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine Setup was run under unprivileged user this will produce development installation do you wish to proceed? (Yes, No) [No]: No You aborted the setup answering no. Il 03/07/2013 11:23, Liu, DanqingX ha scritto: This attachment is the log -Original Message- From: Sandro Bonazzola [mailto:sbona...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:08 PM To: Chen, Wei D Cc: engine-devel; Zhang, Lijuan; Liu, DanqingX Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine If the setup log is not created (it's usually in tmp directory) can you attach the output of OTOPI_DEBUG=1 $HOME/ovirt-engine/bin/engine-setup-2 ? Il 03/07/2013 10:59, Chen, Wei D ha scritto: where is the log file? engine.log and server.log have not created yet. Best Regards, Dave Chen From: Sandro Bonazzola [mailto:sbona...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 4:58 PM To: Chen, Wei D Cc: engine-devel; Zhang, Lijuan; Liu, DanqingX Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine Il 03/07/2013 10:54, Chen, Wei D ha scritto: Hi, We cannot setup engine based on today's source code, any ideas? $HOME/ovirt-engine/bin/engine-setup-2 [ ERROR ] Failed to execute stage 'Booting': 5 [ INFO ] Stage: Initializing Setup was run under unprivileged user this will produce development installation do you wish to proceed? (Yes, No) [No]: Yes [WARNING] engine-setup-2 is a technical preview, and yet to include all functionality that exists in legacy engine-setup. Specifically, engine-setup-2 does not support upgrade from previous installations. Best Regards, Dave Chen ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel Can you attach the log file? -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com engine-setup.log Description: Binary data smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine
I can't reproduce your issue with e9ef0ce577d76ab08b21ae5a11791551d69e0fab without hitting enter (accepting default No) or answering explicitly No to the question. For installing the dev env the answer here has to be Yes. The question is asked when running as unprivileged user and not asked when running as root. Il 03/07/2013 11:49, Chen, Wei D ha scritto: I have not performed this operation. We have tried to setup both on fedora 18 and fedora 19, fedora 18 failed to setup while fedora 19 can setup successfully. Best Regards, Dave Chen -Original Message- From: Sandro Bonazzola [mailto:sbona...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:39 PM To: Liu, DanqingX Cc: Chen, Wei D; engine-devel; Zhang, Lijuan Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine Setup was run under unprivileged user this will produce development installation do you wish to proceed? (Yes, No) [No]: No You aborted the setup answering no. Il 03/07/2013 11:23, Liu, DanqingX ha scritto: This attachment is the log -Original Message- From: Sandro Bonazzola [mailto:sbona...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:08 PM To: Chen, Wei D Cc: engine-devel; Zhang, Lijuan; Liu, DanqingX Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine If the setup log is not created (it's usually in tmp directory) can you attach the output of OTOPI_DEBUG=1 $HOME/ovirt-engine/bin/engine-setup-2 ? Il 03/07/2013 10:59, Chen, Wei D ha scritto: where is the log file? engine.log and server.log have not created yet. Best Regards, Dave Chen From: Sandro Bonazzola [mailto:sbona...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 4:58 PM To: Chen, Wei D Cc: engine-devel; Zhang, Lijuan; Liu, DanqingX Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine Il 03/07/2013 10:54, Chen, Wei D ha scritto: Hi, We cannot setup engine based on today's source code, any ideas? $HOME/ovirt-engine/bin/engine-setup-2 [ ERROR ] Failed to execute stage 'Booting': 5 [ INFO ] Stage: Initializing Setup was run under unprivileged user this will produce development installation do you wish to proceed? (Yes, No) [No]: Yes [WARNING] engine-setup-2 is a technical preview, and yet to include all functionality that exists in legacy engine-setup. Specifically, engine-setup-2 does not support upgrade from previous installations. Best Regards, Dave Chen ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel Can you attach the log file? -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing
On Jul 2, 2013, at 10:44 , Eli Mesika emes...@redhat.com wrote: - Original Message - From: Livnat Peer lp...@redhat.com To: Yair Zaslavsky yzasl...@redhat.com Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 12:57:34 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing On 07/01/2013 11:27 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: - Original Message - From: Martin Perina mper...@redhat.com To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 11:23:12 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing So let me summarize it: We have come to agreement in those questions: 1) SSH Soft Fencing logic should be extracted from VdsNotRespondingTreatment command to its own SshSoftFencingCommand 2) VdsNotRespondingCommand should be refactored so it's not inherited from VdsRestartCommand, but it should run SshSoftFencingCommand or VdsRestartCommand based on defined fencing flow These questions has not been resolved yet: 3) Should SSH Soft Fencing be executed also for hosts without PM configured? 4) Should SSH Soft Fencing execution for hosts without PM configured be enabled by default and admin can turn off these feature using configuration options SshSoftFencingWithoutPmEnabled (or something like that)? 5) Should SshSoftFencingWithoutPmEnabled be a global option or a cluster wide option (can be turned off for specific cluster version) or a VDS option (it can be turned off for each host)? Personally I would suggest: ad 3) Yes, SSH Soft Fencing should be executed also for hosts without PM configured +1 ad 4) Yes, SSH Soft Fencing for hosts without PM configured should be enabled by default +1 ad 5) I don't see any significant reason why someone would like to turn off SSH Soft Fencing for hosts without PM configured. But if someone would like to do that, I think he would like to turn it off only for specific hosts, so VDS level option makes sense for me After re-thinking 5 - I agree. +1 on the other suggestions, but of course we need to get more consensus here. I think it does not need to be configurable. I think a configuration option, as cumbersome and confusing as it can be, is still better than no choice. Especially if it means to restore the previous behavior. If it only can happen in a theoretical problem at customer where vdsm restart cause issues for whatever theoretical reason….it would be of great help then. And if you don't understand the parameter - just don't touch it, I hope that's a general rule:-) +1 on all above as well Martin ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] BatchUpdates and VdsUpdateRuntimeInfo
Liran, It is worth mentioning the environment and duration these measurements were taken. Thanks Barak Azulay - Original Message - From: Liran Zelkha liran.zel...@gmail.com To: engine-devel engine-devel@ovirt.org Cc: Itamar Heim ih...@redhat.com, Barak Azulay bazu...@redhat.com, Allon Mureinik amure...@redhat.com Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 1:08:08 PM Subject: BatchUpdates and VdsUpdateRuntimeInfo Hi all, Batch updates are now merged, so please start using it. As usage example, please check VdsUpdateRuntimeInfo code. Attached doc shows performance benefits from using batch over regular update. ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] [rhevm-staff] Fwd: BatchUpdates and VdsUpdateRuntimeInfo
- Forwarded Message - From: Liran Zelkha liran.zel...@gmail.com To: engine-devel engine-devel@ovirt.org Cc: Itamar Heim ih...@redhat.com, Barak Azulay bazu...@redhat.com, Allon Mureinik amure...@redhat.com Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 1:08:08 PM Subject: BatchUpdates and VdsUpdateRuntimeInfo Hi all, Batch updates are now merged, so please start using it. As usage example, please check VdsUpdateRuntimeInfo code. Attached doc shows performance benefits from using batch over regular update. Batch Updates in VdsUpdateRuntimeInfo.pdf Is the percentage per each VM update? Or a loaded average system? ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] [rhevm-staff] Fwd: BatchUpdates and VdsUpdateRuntimeInfo
Loaded average of a system that only runs update runtime info On Jul 3, 2013 2:45 PM, Michal Skrivanek mskri...@redhat.com wrote: - Forwarded Message - From: Liran Zelkha liran.zel...@gmail.com To: engine-devel engine-devel@ovirt.org Cc: Itamar Heim ih...@redhat.com, Barak Azulay bazu...@redhat.com, Allon Mureinik amure...@redhat.com Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 1:08:08 PM Subject: BatchUpdates and VdsUpdateRuntimeInfo Hi all, Batch updates are now merged, so please start using it. As usage example, please check VdsUpdateRuntimeInfo code. Attached doc shows performance benefits from using batch over regular update. Batch Updates in VdsUpdateRuntimeInfo.pdf Is the percentage per each VM update? Or a loaded average system? ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing
Let's summarize again, SSH Soft Fencing patches has been merged yesterday with following functionality: 1) For hosts with power management configured, SSH Soft Fencing is the 1st fencing stage. If it doesn't help, real fencing will be executed. 2) For hosts without power management configured, SSH Soft Fencing is the only fencing stage. If it doesn't help, host will become non responsive. 3) SSH Soft Fencing is enabled by default, there's no configuration option to disable it 4) SshSoftFencingCommand option is used to define what command is executed during SSH Soft Fencing. It can only be changed manually in database. The whole fencing process in oVirt 3.3 is decribed at http://www.ovirt.org/Automatic_Fencing#Automatic_Fencing_in_oVirt_3.3 Martin Perina - Original Message - From: Michal Skrivanek michal.skriva...@redhat.com To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 12:03:13 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing On Jul 2, 2013, at 10:44 , Eli Mesika emes...@redhat.com wrote: - Original Message - From: Livnat Peer lp...@redhat.com To: Yair Zaslavsky yzasl...@redhat.com Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 12:57:34 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing On 07/01/2013 11:27 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: - Original Message - From: Martin Perina mper...@redhat.com To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 11:23:12 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing So let me summarize it: We have come to agreement in those questions: 1) SSH Soft Fencing logic should be extracted from VdsNotRespondingTreatment command to its own SshSoftFencingCommand 2) VdsNotRespondingCommand should be refactored so it's not inherited from VdsRestartCommand, but it should run SshSoftFencingCommand or VdsRestartCommand based on defined fencing flow These questions has not been resolved yet: 3) Should SSH Soft Fencing be executed also for hosts without PM configured? 4) Should SSH Soft Fencing execution for hosts without PM configured be enabled by default and admin can turn off these feature using configuration options SshSoftFencingWithoutPmEnabled (or something like that)? 5) Should SshSoftFencingWithoutPmEnabled be a global option or a cluster wide option (can be turned off for specific cluster version) or a VDS option (it can be turned off for each host)? Personally I would suggest: ad 3) Yes, SSH Soft Fencing should be executed also for hosts without PM configured +1 ad 4) Yes, SSH Soft Fencing for hosts without PM configured should be enabled by default +1 ad 5) I don't see any significant reason why someone would like to turn off SSH Soft Fencing for hosts without PM configured. But if someone would like to do that, I think he would like to turn it off only for specific hosts, so VDS level option makes sense for me After re-thinking 5 - I agree. +1 on the other suggestions, but of course we need to get more consensus here. I think it does not need to be configurable. I think a configuration option, as cumbersome and confusing as it can be, is still better than no choice. Especially if it means to restore the previous behavior. If it only can happen in a theoretical problem at customer where vdsm restart cause issues for whatever theoretical reason….it would be of great help then. And if you don't understand the parameter - just don't touch it, I hope that's a general rule:-) ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing
Hi Martin, I have some more questions, - Do we persist the host root password for this feature? - If we do, is this feature limited for new hosts, can I provide it for already existing hosts? - Do we encrypt this value when storing in the DB? Thanks, Livnat On 07/03/2013 02:55 PM, Martin Perina wrote: Let's summarize again, SSH Soft Fencing patches has been merged yesterday with following functionality: 1) For hosts with power management configured, SSH Soft Fencing is the 1st fencing stage. If it doesn't help, real fencing will be executed. 2) For hosts without power management configured, SSH Soft Fencing is the only fencing stage. If it doesn't help, host will become non responsive. 3) SSH Soft Fencing is enabled by default, there's no configuration option to disable it 4) SshSoftFencingCommand option is used to define what command is executed during SSH Soft Fencing. It can only be changed manually in database. The whole fencing process in oVirt 3.3 is decribed at http://www.ovirt.org/Automatic_Fencing#Automatic_Fencing_in_oVirt_3.3 Martin Perina - Original Message - From: Michal Skrivanek michal.skriva...@redhat.com To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 12:03:13 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing On Jul 2, 2013, at 10:44 , Eli Mesika emes...@redhat.com wrote: - Original Message - From: Livnat Peer lp...@redhat.com To: Yair Zaslavsky yzasl...@redhat.com Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 12:57:34 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing On 07/01/2013 11:27 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: - Original Message - From: Martin Perina mper...@redhat.com To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 11:23:12 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing So let me summarize it: We have come to agreement in those questions: 1) SSH Soft Fencing logic should be extracted from VdsNotRespondingTreatment command to its own SshSoftFencingCommand 2) VdsNotRespondingCommand should be refactored so it's not inherited from VdsRestartCommand, but it should run SshSoftFencingCommand or VdsRestartCommand based on defined fencing flow These questions has not been resolved yet: 3) Should SSH Soft Fencing be executed also for hosts without PM configured? 4) Should SSH Soft Fencing execution for hosts without PM configured be enabled by default and admin can turn off these feature using configuration options SshSoftFencingWithoutPmEnabled (or something like that)? 5) Should SshSoftFencingWithoutPmEnabled be a global option or a cluster wide option (can be turned off for specific cluster version) or a VDS option (it can be turned off for each host)? Personally I would suggest: ad 3) Yes, SSH Soft Fencing should be executed also for hosts without PM configured +1 ad 4) Yes, SSH Soft Fencing for hosts without PM configured should be enabled by default +1 ad 5) I don't see any significant reason why someone would like to turn off SSH Soft Fencing for hosts without PM configured. But if someone would like to do that, I think he would like to turn it off only for specific hosts, so VDS level option makes sense for me After re-thinking 5 - I agree. +1 on the other suggestions, but of course we need to get more consensus here. I think it does not need to be configurable. I think a configuration option, as cumbersome and confusing as it can be, is still better than no choice. Especially if it means to restore the previous behavior. If it only can happen in a theoretical problem at customer where vdsm restart cause issues for whatever theoretical reason….it would be of great help then. And if you don't understand the parameter - just don't touch it, I hope that's a general rule:-) ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing
- Original Message - From: Livnat Peer lp...@redhat.com To: Martin Perina mper...@redhat.com Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 2:32:16 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing Hi Martin, I have some more questions, - Do we persist the host root password for this feature? - If we do, is this feature limited for new hosts, can I provide it for already existing hosts? - Do we encrypt this value when storing in the DB? Thanks, Livnat Well, SSH connection uses engine default SSH key, no password. So I think this is usable for all hosts. On 07/03/2013 02:55 PM, Martin Perina wrote: Let's summarize again, SSH Soft Fencing patches has been merged yesterday with following functionality: 1) For hosts with power management configured, SSH Soft Fencing is the 1st fencing stage. If it doesn't help, real fencing will be executed. 2) For hosts without power management configured, SSH Soft Fencing is the only fencing stage. If it doesn't help, host will become non responsive. 3) SSH Soft Fencing is enabled by default, there's no configuration option to disable it 4) SshSoftFencingCommand option is used to define what command is executed during SSH Soft Fencing. It can only be changed manually in database. The whole fencing process in oVirt 3.3 is decribed at http://www.ovirt.org/Automatic_Fencing#Automatic_Fencing_in_oVirt_3.3 Martin Perina - Original Message - From: Michal Skrivanek michal.skriva...@redhat.com To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 12:03:13 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing On Jul 2, 2013, at 10:44 , Eli Mesika emes...@redhat.com wrote: - Original Message - From: Livnat Peer lp...@redhat.com To: Yair Zaslavsky yzasl...@redhat.com Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 12:57:34 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing On 07/01/2013 11:27 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: - Original Message - From: Martin Perina mper...@redhat.com To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 11:23:12 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing So let me summarize it: We have come to agreement in those questions: 1) SSH Soft Fencing logic should be extracted from VdsNotRespondingTreatment command to its own SshSoftFencingCommand 2) VdsNotRespondingCommand should be refactored so it's not inherited from VdsRestartCommand, but it should run SshSoftFencingCommand or VdsRestartCommand based on defined fencing flow These questions has not been resolved yet: 3) Should SSH Soft Fencing be executed also for hosts without PM configured? 4) Should SSH Soft Fencing execution for hosts without PM configured be enabled by default and admin can turn off these feature using configuration options SshSoftFencingWithoutPmEnabled (or something like that)? 5) Should SshSoftFencingWithoutPmEnabled be a global option or a cluster wide option (can be turned off for specific cluster version) or a VDS option (it can be turned off for each host)? Personally I would suggest: ad 3) Yes, SSH Soft Fencing should be executed also for hosts without PM configured +1 ad 4) Yes, SSH Soft Fencing for hosts without PM configured should be enabled by default +1 ad 5) I don't see any significant reason why someone would like to turn off SSH Soft Fencing for hosts without PM configured. But if someone would like to do that, I think he would like to turn it off only for specific hosts, so VDS level option makes sense for me After re-thinking 5 - I agree. +1 on the other suggestions, but of course we need to get more consensus here. I think it does not need to be configurable. I think a configuration option, as cumbersome and confusing as it can be, is still better than no choice. Especially if it means to restore the previous behavior. If it only can happen in a theoretical problem at customer where vdsm restart cause issues for whatever theoretical reason….it would be of great help then. And if you don't understand the parameter - just don't touch it, I hope that's a general rule:-) ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] build a single maven project with make
Nice one On 07/03/2013 03:02 PM, Roy Golan wrote: For those of us of dream of clean install a single project like maven please note that mvn has a flag which enables you to build a specific artifact even if your not at that directory mvn -pl groupID:artifactId so say you modified a single class in vdsbroker do this: /make clean install-dev PREFIX=$HOME/ovirt-engine DEV_EXTRA_BUILD_FLAGS=-pl org.ovirt.engine.core:vdsbroker EXTRA_BUILD_FLAGS=-pl org.ovirt.engine.core:vdsbroker/ note: the usage of DEV_EXTRA_BUILD_FLAGS and EXTRA_BUILD_FLAGS is not a mistake. the clean target uses EXTRA_BUILD_FLAGS - please review http://gerrit.ovirt.org/16395 to rectify that. now make the ear: /make clean install-dev PREFIX=$HOME/ovirt-engine DEV_EXTRA_BUILD_FLAGS=-pl org.ovirt.engine:engine-server-ear EXTRA_BUILD_FLAGS=-pl org.ovirt.engine:engine-server-ear/ now your updated artifact is in place. Thanks, Roy ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine
This attachment is the log -Original Message- From: Sandro Bonazzola [mailto:sbona...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 5:08 PM To: Chen, Wei D Cc: engine-devel; Zhang, Lijuan; Liu, DanqingX Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine If the setup log is not created (it's usually in tmp directory) can you attach the output of OTOPI_DEBUG=1 $HOME/ovirt-engine/bin/engine-setup-2 ? Il 03/07/2013 10:59, Chen, Wei D ha scritto: where is the log file? engine.log and server.log have not created yet. Best Regards, Dave Chen From: Sandro Bonazzola [mailto:sbona...@redhat.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2013 4:58 PM To: Chen, Wei D Cc: engine-devel; Zhang, Lijuan; Liu, DanqingX Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] fail to setup engine Il 03/07/2013 10:54, Chen, Wei D ha scritto: Hi, We cannot setup engine based on today's source code, any ideas? $HOME/ovirt-engine/bin/engine-setup-2 [ ERROR ] Failed to execute stage 'Booting': 5 [ INFO ] Stage: Initializing Setup was run under unprivileged user this will produce development installation do you wish to proceed? (Yes, No) [No]: Yes [WARNING] engine-setup-2 is a technical preview, and yet to include all functionality that exists in legacy engine-setup. Specifically, engine-setup-2 does not support upgrade from previous installations. Best Regards, Dave Chen ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel Can you attach the log file? -- Sandro Bonazzola Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration. See how it works at redhat.com engine-setup.log Description: engine-setup.log ___ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing
- Original Message - From: Martin Perina mper...@redhat.com To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 3:39:20 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing - Original Message - From: Livnat Peer lp...@redhat.com To: Martin Perina mper...@redhat.com Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 2:32:16 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing Hi Martin, I have some more questions, - Do we persist the host root password for this feature? - If we do, is this feature limited for new hosts, can I provide it for already existing hosts? - Do we encrypt this value when storing in the DB? Thanks, Livnat Well, SSH connection uses engine default SSH key, no password. So I think this is usable for all hosts. correct, SSH public key is deployed as a part of bootstrap host-deploy from day one. So no need to save the password anywhere. Marin - Where do you take the username (currently only root is supported), but we intend to move away from it, Actually Yaniv.B as added it to the DB as first stage - just making sure you'll use that. Thanks Barak On 07/03/2013 02:55 PM, Martin Perina wrote: Let's summarize again, SSH Soft Fencing patches has been merged yesterday with following functionality: 1) For hosts with power management configured, SSH Soft Fencing is the 1st fencing stage. If it doesn't help, real fencing will be executed. 2) For hosts without power management configured, SSH Soft Fencing is the only fencing stage. If it doesn't help, host will become non responsive. 3) SSH Soft Fencing is enabled by default, there's no configuration option to disable it 4) SshSoftFencingCommand option is used to define what command is executed during SSH Soft Fencing. It can only be changed manually in database. The whole fencing process in oVirt 3.3 is decribed at http://www.ovirt.org/Automatic_Fencing#Automatic_Fencing_in_oVirt_3.3 Martin Perina - Original Message - From: Michal Skrivanek michal.skriva...@redhat.com To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 12:03:13 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing On Jul 2, 2013, at 10:44 , Eli Mesika emes...@redhat.com wrote: - Original Message - From: Livnat Peer lp...@redhat.com To: Yair Zaslavsky yzasl...@redhat.com Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 12:57:34 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing On 07/01/2013 11:27 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: - Original Message - From: Martin Perina mper...@redhat.com To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 11:23:12 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing So let me summarize it: We have come to agreement in those questions: 1) SSH Soft Fencing logic should be extracted from VdsNotRespondingTreatment command to its own SshSoftFencingCommand 2) VdsNotRespondingCommand should be refactored so it's not inherited from VdsRestartCommand, but it should run SshSoftFencingCommand or VdsRestartCommand based on defined fencing flow These questions has not been resolved yet: 3) Should SSH Soft Fencing be executed also for hosts without PM configured? 4) Should SSH Soft Fencing execution for hosts without PM configured be enabled by default and admin can turn off these feature using configuration options SshSoftFencingWithoutPmEnabled (or something like that)? 5) Should SshSoftFencingWithoutPmEnabled be a global option or a cluster wide option (can be turned off for specific cluster version) or a VDS option (it can be turned off for each host)? Personally I would suggest: ad 3) Yes, SSH Soft Fencing should be executed also for hosts without PM configured +1 ad 4) Yes, SSH Soft Fencing for hosts without PM configured should be enabled by default +1 ad 5) I don't see any significant reason why someone would like to turn off SSH Soft Fencing for hosts without PM configured. But if someone would like to do that, I think he would like to turn it off only for specific hosts, so VDS level option makes sense for me After re-thinking 5 - I agree. +1 on the other suggestions, but of course we need to get more consensus here. I think it does not need to be configurable. I think a configuration option, as cumbersome and confusing as it can be, is still better than no choice. Especially if it means to restore the previous behavior. If it only can happen in a theoretical problem at customer where vdsm restart cause issues for whatever theoretical reason….it would be
Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing
- Original Message - From: Barak Azulay bazu...@redhat.com To: Martin Perina mper...@redhat.com, Yaniv Bronheim ybron...@redhat.com Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 5:24:21 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing - Original Message - From: Martin Perina mper...@redhat.com To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 3:39:20 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing - Original Message - From: Livnat Peer lp...@redhat.com To: Martin Perina mper...@redhat.com Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 2:32:16 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing Hi Martin, I have some more questions, - Do we persist the host root password for this feature? - If we do, is this feature limited for new hosts, can I provide it for already existing hosts? - Do we encrypt this value when storing in the DB? Thanks, Livnat Well, SSH connection uses engine default SSH key, no password. So I think this is usable for all hosts. correct, SSH public key is deployed as a part of bootstrap host-deploy from day one. So no need to save the password anywhere. Marin - Where do you take the username (currently only root is supported), but we intend to move away from it, Actually Yaniv.B as added it to the DB as first stage - just making sure you'll use that. Thanks Barak My 2 cents - Actually, Since Martin's work is merged, and Yaniv already has in one of his patches fixes to all relevant places in code he will probably need to add a fix around ssh soft fencing area (or at least coordinate this with Martin). Both Yaniv and Martin are already aware of this. Yair On 07/03/2013 02:55 PM, Martin Perina wrote: Let's summarize again, SSH Soft Fencing patches has been merged yesterday with following functionality: 1) For hosts with power management configured, SSH Soft Fencing is the 1st fencing stage. If it doesn't help, real fencing will be executed. 2) For hosts without power management configured, SSH Soft Fencing is the only fencing stage. If it doesn't help, host will become non responsive. 3) SSH Soft Fencing is enabled by default, there's no configuration option to disable it 4) SshSoftFencingCommand option is used to define what command is executed during SSH Soft Fencing. It can only be changed manually in database. The whole fencing process in oVirt 3.3 is decribed at http://www.ovirt.org/Automatic_Fencing#Automatic_Fencing_in_oVirt_3.3 Martin Perina - Original Message - From: Michal Skrivanek michal.skriva...@redhat.com To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Wednesday, July 3, 2013 12:03:13 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing On Jul 2, 2013, at 10:44 , Eli Mesika emes...@redhat.com wrote: - Original Message - From: Livnat Peer lp...@redhat.com To: Yair Zaslavsky yzasl...@redhat.com Cc: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 12:57:34 PM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing On 07/01/2013 11:27 AM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: - Original Message - From: Martin Perina mper...@redhat.com To: engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Monday, July 1, 2013 11:23:12 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] SSH Soft Fencing So let me summarize it: We have come to agreement in those questions: 1) SSH Soft Fencing logic should be extracted from VdsNotRespondingTreatment command to its own SshSoftFencingCommand 2) VdsNotRespondingCommand should be refactored so it's not inherited from VdsRestartCommand, but it should run SshSoftFencingCommand or VdsRestartCommand based on defined fencing flow These questions has not been resolved yet: 3) Should SSH Soft Fencing be executed also for hosts without PM configured? 4) Should SSH Soft Fencing execution for hosts without PM configured be enabled by default and admin can turn off these feature using configuration options SshSoftFencingWithoutPmEnabled (or something like that)? 5) Should SshSoftFencingWithoutPmEnabled be a global option or a cluster wide option (can be turned off for specific cluster version) or a VDS option (it can be turned off for each host)? Personally I would suggest: ad 3) Yes, SSH Soft Fencing should be executed also for hosts without PM configured +1 ad 4) Yes, SSH Soft Fencing for hosts without PM configured should be enabled by default +1 ad 5) I don't see any significant reason why someone would like to turn off SSH Soft Fencing
Re: [Engine-devel] VNIC profiles
- Original Message - From: Livnat Peer lp...@redhat.com To: Malini Rao m...@redhat.com Cc: engine-devel engine-devel@ovirt.org, Ofri Masad oma...@redhat.com, Eldan Hildesheim ehild...@redhat.com Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2013 2:00:03 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] VNIC profiles On 07/01/2013 09:22 PM, Malini Rao wrote: Hi Livnat, My name is Malini Rao and I am the lead interaction designer dedicated to RHEV/Ovirt UX from Red Hat and we have another interaction designer Eldan Hildeshiem who is also focused on RHEV UX. Hi Malini - nice to e-meet you :) I went over your feature page and in general, the GUI proposals look great. I do have some quick feedback comments - Just a small credit correction - the feature page is Ofri's feature page, I added some feedback of my own :) Sorry about that! Ofri, I look forward to collaborating with you and I hope we can contribute to this feature from the UX/ usability perspective. Will there be any predefined profiles available to the users out of the box in RHEV? Or will they have to define their own? If you start with a clean install setup there are no predefined vNICs profiles. Profiles can be generated in two flows, a user can explicitly generate a profile or when admin network creates a new network he can mark create a profile for this network** in a single action. A VNIC profile is the link between the abstract network entity and the VM which consumes this network. If you upgrade existing setup, in the upgrade process profiles will be created per network and will be attached to the VNICs that are currently using the network. So you are saying any VNIC profiles created and the associations with VMS that already exist will be preserved during Upgrades... correct? But none of these need to be pre-defined ( as in something that was available to the user automatically and not via user action)... correct? **This is not accurate, the user would be able to check all relevant VNIC-QoS-entities and for each one we need to create a profile. So there are two concepts here - VNIC-QoS-entities and VNIC Profiles? I am wondering if there are any common standard QoS levels that can be predefined and the users can get a heeadstart and use or tweak instead of defining from scratch. That's a very good point. The wiki page is not fully up to date, I think. Ofri wanted to add an entity of VNIC QoS which would be linked from within the VNIC profile. The VNIC QoS entity is located in the entities hierarchy under Data Center. The point you made, I think, is will we have predefined VNIC QoS entities. The Qos entity is tight to the hardware you have in your DC. If you have 10G or 1G Ethernet links the QoS entities would look very different, so I'm not sure what predefined values would look like. So are you saying that we can have pre-defined VNIC Qos Entities like Gold, silver etc. but not VNIC profiles because what is gold for a 10G Ehternet is different from gold for a 1G Ethernet? But even if they are different, can the VNIC profiles not also be auto generated based on the Hardware and the VNIC Qos Entities? VNIC level QoS dialog 1. Will the Outbound and inbound values come with some defaults? Or will they be empty? Is there a need for any spinners or drop downs for frequently used values or is it ok to just have fields to type in the numeric values? Also I am assuming there is some kind of validation to ensure only numbers an be entered in these fields. 2. For custom properties, why do we have a drop down? Can custom properties defined elsewhere be accessed here and applied? If not, then I am assuming this will have to be a text field. Correct? Also, I am guessing if there is only one custom property field, the [-] icon will be disabled. Edit Network Interface Dialog 1. It will be awesome if under the Profile Field value, you can present a short summary of the profile in gray text. alternately, there can be a little info icon which will present this info on hover. This will help people who pick Gold know what that means vs silver or any other profile. Besides these specific feedback, I am wondering if any of the VM dialogs are affected by this? Will a VNIC profile field now show up on those dialogs as well? I see you have identified a bunch of open issues to work out and we will be more than happy to help you with the GUI for these flows as needed. Please feel free to reach out to Eldan and me and we can post back to the group with our work. Thank you Malini for the above feedback, I think these are good questions. Ofri - can you comment on the above ? Looking forward to some of the answers to the questions above. Livnat Thanks Malini - Original Message - From: Livnat Peer lp...@redhat.com To: engine-devel engine-devel@ovirt.org, Ofri Masad oma...@redhat.com
