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
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
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
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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1683
LGTM for testing
Before
sshClient: DEBUG: {Cmd: ping -c 3 8.8.8.8 via Host: 10.140.12.103}
{returns: [u'PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data.', u'64 bytes from
8.8.8.8
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/871
@jburwell @rhtyd @karuturi @nvazquez I assume the current code doesnât
allow volume snapshots on the top of vmsnapshots on purpose. In that case is it
best to revert PR871 or create a new PR
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1615
@jburwell This PR is waiting for your 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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
@jburwell @rhtyd What are your ideas on where in DB to store 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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1542
@rhtyd @jburwell @rafaelweingartner @koushik-das Can we agree if this PR is
OK as it is ?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1651
@PaulAngus @jburwell @rhtyd This PR was closed without merging. Are we
still on track to include the fix to 4.9.1 ? I can ask @nvazquez to pick this
one up if needed.
---
If your project
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1681
@murali-reddy This issue might be related to PR1660. Do you mind testing
against latest master to see if you it is addressed already?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1676
@jburwell We just re-run integration tests. The same environment as 1560.
You can now safely back out 1560 and forward merge this one.
'''
test DeployVM in anti-affinity groups
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1639
Macchinina template doesn't seem to work in vmware hypervisor. When VM
deployed eth0 is not created. We probably need to make sure a template is fully
operational on all 3 hypervisors to include
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1675
Macchinina template doesn't seem to work in vmware hypervisor. When VM
deployed eth0 is not created. We probably need to make sure a template is fully
operational on all 3 hypervisors to include
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1542
@rhtyd @jburwell @rafaelweingartner @koushik-das The rationale to have
vmware.nested.virtualization.perVM was that advanced vm_details and template
details are user controlled. With
https
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1602
LGTM for the testing. Smoke test results
```
test DeployVM in anti-affinity groups for project ... === TestName:
test_DeployVmAntiAffinityGroup_in_project | Status : SUCCESS ===
test
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
@jburwell Creating a new table to hold one setting seems to be excessive.
How about using sequence table? In this regard last_Id used by usage sanity
checker is a sequence.
---
If your project
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
@rhtyd @jburwell @rafaelweingartner I agree with @rhtyd to move sanity
checker last_id to the DB. No reason to keep in in file system. How about using
"usage.sanity.check.l
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1615
@koushik-das Yes, an integration test is in the works. I will post results
here in few days
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1651
@PaulAngus @jburwell Can we squash commits and merge this one? This will
allow us to include 5 more integration test results for other PRs
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1661
LGTM for the 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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1560
@rafaelweingartner @jburwell @karuturi Integration tests passed after merge
conflict resolution
test DeployVM in anti-affinity groups for project ... === TestName
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1602
@karuturi @jburwell @rafaelweingartner Please disregard. We are still
running tests for this PR
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1602
@karuturi @jburwell @rafaelweingartner Can you check if this PR can be
merged?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1602
LGTM for testing
[root@ussarlabcsmgt41 MarvinLogs]# cat
/tmp//MarvinLogs/test_volumes_CP3Z7R/results.txt
test DeployVM in anti-affinity groups for project ... === TestName
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1560
@rafaelweingartner @jburwell This PR seems to be ready for merging as well
---
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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1560
LGTM for testing. Re-ran smoke tests:
test DeployVM in anti-affinity groups for project ... === TestName:
test_DeployVmAntiAffinityGroup_in_project | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
test
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1660
@jburwell Thanks a lot.
---
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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1660
@rafaelweingartner . Thanks. I believe per current process any committer
can merge PRs as per below. We have so many PRs in merge ready state
Github user jburwell commented
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1605
@rhtyd @jburwell @swill @koushik-das @rafaelweingartner @wido This PR has
enough of everything. Can one of the committers merge it?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1651
@rhtyd @jburwell @swill @koushik-das @rafaelweingartner @wido This PR has
enough of everything. Can one of the committers merge it?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1660
@rhtyd @jburwell @swill @koushik-das @rafaelweingartner @wido This PR has
enough of everything. Can one of the committers merge it?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1660
@rhtyd @jburwell Just re-ran Marvin tests. All passes including
test_network_acl which fails without this fix.
[root@ussarlabcsmgt41 ~]# cat
/tmp//MarvinLogs/test_volumes_939G6N
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1668
@borisstoyanov This PR can be probably closed since the issue with correct
ping responses is being addressed globally in PR1651
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1560
@rhtyd @jburwell Can this be merged?
---
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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
@rhtyd @jburwell Can this be merged?
---
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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1660
@rhtyd @jburwell Can this be merged?
---
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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1660
@jburwell With this PR test_network_acl is successfull
[root@ussarlabcsmgt41 Aug_23_2016_16_49_32_8HYYKG]# tail results.txt
Test network ACL lists and items in VPC ... === TestName
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1651
LGTM for testing
Before
sshClient: DEBUG: {Cmd: ping -c 3 8.8.8.8 via Host: 10.140.12.103}
{returns: [u'PING 8.8.8.8 (8.8.8.8) 56(84) bytes of data.', u'64 bytes from
8.8.8.8: icmp_seq
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
LGTM with smoke testing. RHEL 6 management servers, advanced networking,
Vmware 5.5 .and 6 hypervisors
[root@ussarlabcsmgt41 smoke]# cat
/tmp//MarvinLogs/test_volumes_340FH1
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1605
LGTM for testing. Vmware ESX 5.5 and 6.0 hypervisors, advanced networking,
RHEL 6 management servers
[root@ussarlabcsmgt41 ~]# cat
/tmp//MarvinLogs/test_volumes_930LZ3/results.txt|grep
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1660
Also we wrote a tester for SshHelper.sshExecute method. It was returning
output of SSHexecute command as it gets received by sshExecute. Here they are
100 sequential runs (success if result
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1660
LGTM for the test.
Exception in network_acl_test **before the fix**
[root@ussarlabcsmgt41 cloudstack]# cat /tmp//MarvinLogs//NB313W/results.txt
Test network ACL lists and items in VPC
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
@rhtyd Confirming. No issues on usage and management servers.
---
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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1657
LGTM
---
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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1656
LGTM
---
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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1650
We tried macchinina template during test cases on ESX with E1000 adapter
and VMs doesn't come with eth0 causing test_internal_lb.py and test_vpc_vpn.py
to fail on a real hypervisor test. Has
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1605
@jburwell The support for passing vGPU parameters is already implemented
via PR1310 which has a test case. This PR is only performance optimization by
reducing an extra reconfgtask which save
Github user serg38 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1605#discussion_r75796954
--- Diff:
plugins/hypervisors/vmware/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/vmware/resource/VmwareResource.java
---
@@ -2042,49 +2043,46 @@ protected void
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
@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
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commit/db854a35790c77099e9f82a4e2dd77edd5be3eed#commitcomment-18732552
Don't you need to put a space in from of 0 to exclude e.g 100% packet loss ?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1651
Debian returns: 1 packets transmitted, 1 packets received, 0% packet loss
CentOs returns: 1 packets transmitted, 1 received, 0% packet loss, time 4ms
Between those 2 we could
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1615
@jburwell Support for NFS version for Secondary storage is already merged
via PR 1361. Since there were integration tests developed and executed over
there we seem to be needed tests only
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
@jburwell LGTM for the test part. This PR was extensively tested on
Environment: RHEL 6 management servers, Vmware ESX5.5 and 6.0 with advanced
networking
---
If your project is set up
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1542
@jburwell @rhtyd @koushik-das Can you review this 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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1560
@rafaelweingartner @jburwell @rhtyd @koushik-das Can you review this 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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
@karuturi @jburwell There are 2 LGTM in this PR. Packaging, Travis and
Jenkins all passed. Can this be merged?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1602
@jburwell Are there any outstanding issues with this PR? It is waiting for
second LGTM.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1605
@rafaelweingartner @swill Will you be able to review this one?
---
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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1615
@jburwell Are there any outstanding issues with this PR? It is waiting for
second LGTM.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1542
@rafaelweingartner That's correct. At this point advanced VM details and
advanced template details have no UI exposure. At some point we can bring in PR
to show this in UI and allow API based
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1605
Ping for review -- @sateesh-chodapuneedi, @rhtyd, @koushik-das
---
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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1615
Ping for second review -- @GabrielBrascher, @rhtyd, @wido,
@rafaelweingartner
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1602
@syed. Absolutely it can although the effort seems to be well beyond and
scope of this PR. @nvazquez and I have only access to vmware hypervisors at
this point. If there is an interest to expand
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1602
@syed. The default behavior won't change. The proposed enhancement will add
an ability to control link/full clone deployment of a primary storage level. If
it is not defined there a current
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1602
@syed. On Vmware using link cloned was a default behavior. The primary use
cases are:
- storage saving if underlying arrays don't support deduplication
- speed of the deployment
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593
@jburwell If no sanity-check-last-id is present it will run Sanity on the
whole cloud_usage data set and then create a new sanity-check-last-id file. The
whole part of sanity checking related
Github user serg38 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1593#discussion_r67618240
--- Diff: usage/conf/log4j-cloud_usage.xml.in ---
@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ under the License
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1518#issuecomment-220652018
@swill Travis passed. Looks like it is ready to merge.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1542#issuecomment-219473209
@remibergsma, @DaanHoogland Current global support for nested
virtualization is only vmware specific and done in VmwareGuru.
Are you proposing to move
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1542#issuecomment-219468957
@remibergsma In some private cloud environments nested virtualization is
not a good fit so it is generally disabled. That's fine but we found that it
would be very
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1518#issuecomment-219154273
This doesn't seem to be related to this PR.Can you post
managment-server.log extract around the failure time?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/798#issuecomment-219067011
It would be nice if this is resolved. The issue still exists in 4.9
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1502#issuecomment-218543261
@swill PR1539 passed Jenkins and Travis. After you merge it should resolve
the issue in other PRs
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1497#issuecomment-218480013
The issue that it couldn't find a snaphsot because it is already cleaned by
account cleanup.
+cls._cleanup
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1497#issuecomment-218466672
@swill Last Travis run for this PR was a success for
test_list_ids_parameter. Which PR gives an issue?
Marvin Init Successful
=== TestName
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1518#issuecomment-218052341
@koushik-das Will you be able to review this PR? It has been waiting for
2d LGTM for a while now.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1466#issuecomment-216967912
@rhtyd I just finished QA of changes on MySQL 5.1, 5.5, 5.6 and 5.7. No
issues. 64byte index on ssh_keypairs table is created fine on all DB platforms.
@koushik
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1466#issuecomment-216876560
Thanks @koushik-das. Looks like before 5.6 Mysql auto restricted length of
InnoDB indexes to 255 characters without giving trouble if index length is not
specified
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1518#issuecomment-216650029
All checks passed. @rhtyd, @wido or @GabrielBrascher can you review and
give second OK.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1466#issuecomment-216574386
All checks have been passed after squashing. @swill did you CI run pass? If
so can you merge it please?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1466#issuecomment-215572026
With this change PR passed Travis and Jenkins. @rafaelweingartner and
@rhtyd will you be able to give your blessing?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1466#issuecomment-208387324
@rafaelweingartner. That's correct. 3 indexes: 1 - primary + 2 unique
indexes, all based on ID column. Those 2 unique indexes are not needed and only
consume disk
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1466#issuecomment-208121230
@rafaelweingartner
>>>>>>>>
Here you change this table "ovs_tunnel_network", you dropped the primary
key "id";
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1457#issuecomment-206990689
@rafaelweingartner On a general note we got a verbal commitment from
Accelerite who bought CloudPlatform from Citrix last month to contribute more
to the community
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1457#issuecomment-206989623
@swill , @rafaelweingartner I work very closely with @nvazquez. His PRs
pass very rigorous testing in our Lab on physical Vmware hypervisors. I
reviewed his code
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1457#issuecomment-204152844
@rafaelweingartner How about 'cluster.exclude' or
'cluster.storage.operations.exclude'. I think the latter is the better choice.
---
If your project is set up
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1425#issuecomment-204005079
Great!!! 2 LGTM received. Can we have this merged?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1361#issuecomment-185256350
If requirements to use particular NFS version is known beforehand it can
be specified during the image store creation using details argument
details[0].key
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1361#issuecomment-184799968
Hi committers,
Can someone perform a second review and merge it at the earliest? We would
like this to be part of 4.9?
---
If your project is set up
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1361#issuecomment-174554271
Unfortunately NFS version negotiation doesn't work properly with all
storage vendors. Some vendors e.g. Tintri require that vers=3 is supplied in
mount command
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1361#issuecomment-174746870
I believe the main reason is to provide the most of backward compatibility.
image_store_details doesn't have NFS version in existing installations so after
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1094#issuecomment-163684761
Assuming everything else is ready e.g. service controllers, transport zone,
management server, STT tunnels in-between then to create L2 gateway (page 89 of
the User
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1094#issuecomment-162532791
This index comes from schema-40to410.sql:
CREATE TABLE `cloud`.`nicira_nvp_router_map` (
`id` bigint unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT COMMENT 'id
Github user serg38 commented on the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1094#issuecomment-162319994
Since you are testing L3 connectivity existing switch patch to router
shouldn't overlap an ip range used by the new subnet. Cidr #1 should work fine
. You might
201 - 295 of 295 matches
Mail list logo
