Re: VR refactoring, concerns and a way out ?

of failures and it will take us good time to get those fixed. >>> >>> Besides the BVTs, regression tests are in a very bad shape. Hope to get to >>> these starting next week. >>> >>> Please see my latest bvt report, I will post in another 2 hrs, waitin

Re: new colleagues

Congrats Dahn! On 01/10/15 12:07, "Daan Hoogland" wrote: >Hello fellow stackers, > >This to let you know that I just entered the building of Leaseweb, in order >to be working there for the next couple of years. You know them via Whei >Zou, who will be my close

Re: BVT report 10/1

Thanks Raja, Just merged #900. PR #902 doesn’t have any review yet. Once it got them, I’ll merge it as well. I’m running BVT tests against some of the PRs that resolve blockers. Please help running the tests, as it takes quite some time. Without it, we risk of breaking things that were fixed

Re: 4.6 blockers

Indeed, this was created over night and is also against 4.5 https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-8920 We should not consider that a blocker, as I have done this many times without issues. Will comment and ask for more details. Regards, Remi On 29/09/15 14:21, "Wilder Rodrigues"

Re: Blameless post mortem

's great. >>> >>> Let's focus on the blockers now, everything else can wait. >>> >>> The big bonus of doing what we are doing is that once 4.6.0 is out, we can >>> merge PRs again (assuming they are properly rebased and tested) and we can >>> re

Re: Blameless post mortem

is supposed to do. > >Regards, >Bharat. > >On 28-Sep-2015, at 2:51 pm, Remi Bergsma <rberg...@schubergphilis.com> wrote: > >> Hi Bharat, >> >> I understand your frustrations but we already agreed on this so no need to >> repeat. This thread is suppose

Re: Blameless post mortem

, "Sebastien Goasguen" <run...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Sep 28, 2015, at 1:14 PM, Remi Bergsma <rberg...@schubergphilis.com> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Bharat, >> >> >> There is only one way to prove a feature works: with tests. That’s why

Re: Blameless post mortem

changes. > >I am not suggesting that we should revert the vr refactor code, I am willing >to work on this and fix the issues, I am only asking if we can get some >documentation. > > >Regards, >Bharat. > >On 28-Sep-2015, at 4:59 pm, Sebastien Goasguen <run...@g

Re: Blameless post mortem

le are facing >issues. A proper documentation will help in understanding these in a better >way. > >Thanks, >Bharat. > >On 28-Sep-2015, at 1:57 pm, Remi Bergsma <rberg...@schubergphilis.com> wrote: > >> Hi Bharat, >> >> There is no bigger

Re: [j.bac.o] Jenkins jobs cleanup

4.3 remove is fine with me. Sent from my iPhone > On 27 Sep 2015, at 16:39, Pierre-Luc Dion wrote: > > Hi, > > We recently ran out of space on jenkins master of j.bac.o [1]. Does anyone > would object if we removed all jobs for 4.3 builds ? I did some build jobs > for

Blameless post mortem

Hi all, This mail is intended to be blameless. We need to learn something from it. That's why I left out who exactly did what because it’s not relevant. There are multiple examples but it's about the why. Let's learn from this without blaming anyone. We know we need automated testing. We have

Re: BVT report 9/23

Hi Raja, Thanks for the report. Can you please add details, so we can see what tests exactly fail? We can then try to reproduce / root cause. Regards, Remi > On 24 Sep 2015, at 21:09, Raja Pullela wrote: > > BVT report 09/23 > > simulator basic - 30% , earlier

Re: BVT report - 9/21

Thanks for the report! It’d really help if people would prepend their PR with ‘[BLOCKER]’ (like Boris did) so we can identify them and make sure they get the right attention. @Wilder shall we share the load a bit more here and ask other to help with the issues currently assigned to you? Also,

Re: Proposal to get to 100% passrate on BVTs

Hi Raja, Let’s think of a way to get the BVT score on any PR that is opened. Then we know if there’s a problem introduced in a PR before merge, instead of after. We need to automate this, or else we keep having the same issues. We can meet online somewhere next week to discuss our approach?

Re: [PROPOSAL] stable master and 4.6 release

If we all go for it, fix the blocker issues and test 4.6, then we should be able to do it! The CCCEU conference is in ~4 weeks, seems like a great deadline to work towards. But again, we all need to work together to make it happen. Let’s not forget that making master stable is hard. Just as

Re: Repo CS 4.5 for CentOS 7.x Missing

Hi, The question is, is CentOS7 even supported on 4.5? The docs say it isn’t and when we were voting for 4.5.2 (http://markmail.org/message/36vnwh4kiilhkunu) I found some issues with CentOS 7. Regarding the KVM agent, that doesn’t work properly on 4.5 (which is now fixed on master). You can

RE: Repo CS 4.5 for CentOS 7.x Missing

to verify it, once the PR is there. Regards, Remi -Original Message- From: Wido den Hollander [mailto:w...@widodh.nl] Sent: zondag 13 september 2015 11:28 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: Repo CS 4.5 for CentOS 7.x Missing On 09/13/2015 10:47 AM, Remi Bergsma wrote: >

No more direct commits to master please!

Hi all, What happened to master? I see a lot of direct commits. I thought we agreed to make a PR, then _merge_ it to master with the script in ./tools/git/git-pr. We’re getting ready for a 4.6 RC and this makes stuff extra hard to track. Most direct commits seem to come from PRs, but I don’t

Update on ACS 4.6

Hi all, A lot of work is being done to make 4.6 ready for a release. It's great to see it's getting better every day! Today Rajani and myself looked at all blocker and critical issues on 4.6. We decided to bump some of them to blocker. Two more issues need to verified against current

Re: Cloudstack session storage in Redis or Memcache databases

Hi Artjoms, Why would you want to share sessions? If you refer to login, I’d go for single-sign-on instead. SAML2 landed in 4.5 I think and it is awesome. Regards, Remi From: Artjoms Petrovs Reply-To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" Date: Thursday 10 September

Re: Heads-up: Serious investigator issue in 4.4

mi, Are you sure the async job issue is not fixed in 4.4.4? Because for us upgrading to it did solve that problem so far. Thanks for sharing latest info, Cheers PL On Sep 4, 2015 4:34 PM, "Remi Bergsma" <rberg...@schubergphilis.com<mailto:rberg...@schubergphilis.com>> wrot

Re: Build failed in Jenkins: build-master-slowbuild #2238

FYI: talked to Rajani and the findbugs issue will be resolved Monday. The actual build works so I can live with the delay. Sent from my iPhone > On 06 Sep 2015, at 07:19, "jenk...@cloudstack.org" > wrote: > > See

Heads-up: Serious investigator issue in 4.4

Hi all, This brought me some serious headaches this week. HA in 4.4.4 (and any 4.4.x version would have this) doesn't do investigations properly due to the Hyper-V investigator returning false instead of null. So, it confirms any VM as down whereas it may be running. Yes, this becomes a mess

Re: [BLOCKER] Master broken due to PR 714 (CLOUDSTACK-8750)

I say we revert so the 4.6 testing can continue and then work on fixing why this broke the build. No hard feelings, we simply need master to build. If someone can revert, please do. I can do it in about two hours. Sent from my iPhone On 31 Aug 2015, at 06:58, Koushik Das

Re: Discuss reserving memory on KVM hypervisors ref: CLOUDSTACK-8678

Making the agent property work (host.reserved.mem.mb) would be awesome! On labs you can then set it to something low. Let me know if you need help with testing! Thanks, Remi Sent from my iPhone On 29 Aug 2015, at 07:49, Erik Weber terbol...@gmail.com wrote: Make it configurable to

Re: FYI: MariaDB upgrade on CentOS 7 breaks install

COMMENT 'Time this was updated by the server. null means this row is obsolete.'; 2015-08-27 12:03 GMT+02:00 Wido den Hollander w...@widodh.nl: On 08/26/2015 10:33 PM, Remi Bergsma wrote: Hi all, Not sure if MariaDB is even supported, but for those who use it: Today I run

Re: FYI: MariaDB upgrade on CentOS 7 breaks install

Missed that one, thx! ;-) On 27/08/15 12:03, Wido den Hollander w...@widodh.nl wrote: On 08/26/2015 10:33 PM, Remi Bergsma wrote: Hi all, Not sure if MariaDB is even supported, but for those who use it: Today I run into an issue with the latest MariaDB on CentOS7 (it was upgraded from

FYI: MariaDB upgrade on CentOS 7 breaks install

Hi all, Not sure if MariaDB is even supported, but for those who use it: Today I run into an issue with the latest MariaDB on CentOS7 (it was upgraded from 5.5.41 - 5.5.44). After the upgrade I could no longer install CloudStack due to the following error (traced it to this file by executing

Re: [DISCUSS] Improving community experience for (new) contributors

Hi Rohit, Thanks for sharing your observations. I agree with you that anybody that contributes (or uses) Apache CloudStack should feel welcome in the community. In the past weeks I tried to respond to as many PRs as I could and merge them as soon as it met the requirements. When I can not

Re: SDN solutions in use today with CloudStack

that integrate with a XenServer based environment? Regards Zaeem On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 1:17 AM, Remi Bergsma rberg...@schubergphilis.com wrote: Hi Simon, At Schuberg Philis we use Nicira (which nowadays is called VMware NSX-MH) in production since 2012. It works well for us. The plugin

Re: Merging Pull Requests

Hi Wido, Nice! The latest version should detect your Apache GitHub remote name. Regards, Remi On 20 Aug 2015, at 09:13, Wido den Hollander w...@widodh.nl wrote: On 19-08-15 17:27, Remi Bergsma wrote: Hi all, As it is now, additions to CloudStack need to go through a GitHub PR

Re: [VOTE] Apache Cloudstack 4.5.2 (Round 2)

Hi all, +1 (binding) Tested: 1. Advanced zone with XenServer - Deployed VPCs, VMs and VPNs between them - Crashed a XenServer, watched it recover - Tested it again and all was fine. All I had to do was reset the VPN connection, but maybe it'd have done it automatically if I waited

Re: SDN solutions in use today with CloudStack

Hi Simon, At Schuberg Philis we use Nicira (which nowadays is called VMware NSX-MH) in production since 2012. It works well for us. The plugin is also still maintained and is getting some tlc as we speak. The Nuage plugin was introduced recently, I think in 4.5. I hear people are using this a

Merging Pull Requests

Hi all, As it is now, additions to CloudStack need to go through a GitHub PR and, if accepted, merged to the Apache remote (not in GitHub). This means that merging a PR for CloudStack is a bit more involved than merging a normal GitHub PR. To help with this, Miguel, Rajani, Daan and myself,

Re: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity

to distinguish discarded vs. Merged prs. On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 21:51 PM, Mike Tutkowski mike.tutkow...@solidfire.commailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com wrote: +1 Sounds reasonable On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Remi Bergsma rberg...@schubergphilis.commailto:rberg...@schubergphilis.com

Review PRs: please help!

Hi all, Could you please have a look at the PRs we have waiting [1] and review them? Test it, look at the code or otherwise review them. Add comments, or add a LGTM when you think it’s OK. Even if you review just one PR per day it already helps :-) I’ll keep an eye on them as well and will

[PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity

Hi all, There are several PRs that are quite old. They haven't been updated by their author for over a month and there was no response to comments made. As a RM, I want to maintain an as-short-as-possible list of PRs that is actively worked on. It is perfectly fine if a PR is open for a longer

Re: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity

17, 2015 at 5:49 PM Somesh Naidu somesh.na...@citrix.com wrote: +1 Regards, Somesh -Original Message- From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:rberg...@schubergphilis.com] Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 10:26 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: [PROPOSAL

Re: [PROPOSAL] Closing PRs older than 1 month and without activity

also agree with Boris that we need to distinguish discarded vs. Merged prs. On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 21:51 PM, Mike Tutkowski mike.tutkow...@solidfire.commailto:mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com wrote: +1 Sounds reasonable On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Remi Bergsma rberg

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache CloudStack CloudMonkey 5.3.2

+1 (binding) Compiled, installed and did some basic testing. Then run some dev/test scripts to deploy test infra with cloudmonkey and that all works fine. On 14 Aug 2015, at 11:08, Rohit Yadav bhais...@apache.org wrote: Hi All, I've created a 5.3.2 release of CloudMonkey, with the

Re: [Blocker/Critical] VR related Issues

Hi Kishan, Thanks for your mail, we clearly need to spend some time in debugging and fixing these issues. Let me look into the blocking Remote Access VPN issue (CLOUDSTACK-8690) and see if I can reproduce / fix it. Regards, Remi On 11 Aug 2015, at 11:33, Kishan Kavala

Re: Remi Bergsma joins the PMC

invited Remi Bergsma to join its ranks. I am happy to say that he accepted. Please join me in congratulating Remi. ​regards,​ -- Daan

Re: Anyone wants to take over these orphaned PRs?

sureshkumar.anapa...@citrix.com wrote: Hi Remi, I'll work on these PRs and finalize them. Will send new PRs for them. As Likitha is not responding, Can we take up the testcases for LGTM(s) PRs later and merge them? Thanks, Suresh -Original Message- From: Remi Bergsma

Re: happy birthday dear cloudstack.git

Awesome! Happy birthday :-) On 10 Aug 2015, at 13:39, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.commailto:rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Fantastic :) On 10-Aug-2015, at 3:07 pm, Punith S punit...@cloudbyte.commailto:punit...@cloudbyte.com wrote: Wow! happy birthday cloudstack :) On Mon, Aug 10,

Anyone wants to take over these orphaned PRs?

Hi all, These are 9 PRs sent by Likitha. If I understand correctly Likitha is no longer working with Citrix/ACS. The PRs seem mostly VMware related. Some have LGTM(s), most have comments about missing unit tests. What do we want to do with them? There's probably not gonna be an update from

Re: Anyone wants to take over these orphaned PRs?

it as the code itself LGTM. On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 12:49 PM, Remi Bergsma rberg...@schubergphilis.com wrote: Hi all, These are 9 PRs sent by Likitha. If I understand correctly Likitha is no longer working with Citrix/ACS. The PRs seem mostly VMware related. Some have LGTM(s), most have comments

Re: Super trivial code change and PR

We'll live with it this time I'd say ;-) Thanks for bringing it up! Regards, Remi On 06 Aug 2015, at 08:09, Mike Tutkowski mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com wrote: Fair enough Do you want me to revert this one or are we OK to just live with it? On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 11:57 PM, Remi Bergsma

Re: s2s vpn related iptables are not applied on VR

Hi, Could you please create an ACS issue for this, so we can track it? Sounds like something we need to fix. Thanks, Remi On 05 Aug 2015, at 14:30, Jayapal Reddy Uradi jayapalreddy.ur...@citrix.com wrote: Hi, I haves configured the s2s vpn in vpc network. Observed that the iptables

Re: Super trivial code change and PR

Hi Mike, Yes, I want everything to go through a PR. Otherwise: - there are no Travis CI and other tests run - we need to describe what 'trivial' is and what not - the change is not visible The goal is a stable master at all times and we cannot reach that with direct commits. I do get your

[PROPOSAL] Release principles for Apache CloudStack

Hi all, First of all, thanks for all the feedback! There were two approaches discussed to handle bug fixing (as you can read in discussion tread [1]) and we simply went ahead and tried them both. That’s how we figured out the best one (we also described why we choose this approach over the

ACS 4.6 RC is just around the corner!

Hi all, The last remaining blocker was just resolved! There are some bugs being worked on that should be ready in the next couple of days. We will create the RC when these issues are resolved: CLOUDSTACK-8688: Default policy for INPUT and FORWARD chain is ACCEPT in VR filter table [1]

Re: [DISCUSS][PROPOSAL] cleanup repo

+1 On 02 Aug 2015, at 15:46, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: As we are changing our review process I want to clean up the repository at apache getting rid of stale branches. Of course the release branches of old releases should stay, but a lot of old branches have been merged

Re: [DISCUSS] Release principles for Apache CloudStack

. ​ [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Release+principles+for+Apache+CloudStack On 02-Jul-2015, at 5:16 pm, Remi Bergsma r...@remi.nl wrote: Hi all, We already agreed contributions should always go via a PR and require two LGTM’s before we merge. Let me propose the next

Re: IRC and Slack

(that's for everyone ) -let's try to setup some slack/IRC proxy so that folks who are using Slack right now can make the IRC folks benefit from their conversation. ( I think Remi said he would test something out) -sebastien On Jul 4, 2015, at 6:27 PM, Remi Bergsma r...@remi.nl wrote: John

Re: IRC and Slack

On Jul 3, 2015, at 4:17 AM, Remi Bergsma r...@remi.nl wrote: I setup a proof-of-concept a while back to test it: http://cloudstackdev.slack.com. There currently are around 30 people, mostly dev from this list. Anyone with an @apache.org account can sign-up and anyone else could ask me, Daan

Re: [DISCUSS] Release principles for Apache CloudStack

and continue discussing on how we want to maintain 4.6.x(may be we would never need one ;)) I can volunteer to be the additional RM for 4.6. ~Rajani On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Remi Bergsma r...@remi.nl mailto:r...@remi.nl wrote: Hi Rajani, all, I do think we have the same goal

Re: [DISCUSS] Release principles for Apache CloudStack

On 3 jul. 2015, at 09:21, sebgoa run...@gmail.com wrote: On Jul 3, 2015, at 9:06 AM, Raja Pullela raja.pull...@citrix.com wrote: Remi, couple of questions on the branching part - when we take the Feature PR and Feature is back in Master, feel like we are potentially destabilizing

Re: [DISCUSS] Release principles for Apache CloudStack

scale) 4.4 to 4.5 to master etc. That way, none of the changes will be missed and git branch --contains gives a nice view of where all the changes went. On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 23:16 PM, Remi Bergsma r...@remi.nl mailto:r...@remi.nl wrote: Hi Daan, Indeed. I prefer committing to master

Re: IRC and Slack

I setup a proof-of-concept a while back to test it: http://cloudstackdev.slack.com. There currently are around 30 people, mostly dev from this list. Anyone with an @apache.org account can sign-up and anyone else could ask me, Daan, Rohit, Wilder or Funs for an invite (for now). I can imagine

[DISCUSS] Release principles for Apache CloudStack

Hi all, We already agreed contributions should always go via a PR and require two LGTM’s before we merge. Let me propose the next step on how I think we should do release management for 4.6 and on. I talked to several people over the past weeks and wrote this wiki article:

Re: [DISCUSS] Release principles for Apache CloudStack

and selectively merged back to x.y branch? -Original Message- From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:r...@remi.nl] Sent: 02 July 2015 17:17 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: [DISCUSS] Release principles for Apache CloudStack Hi all, We already agreed contributions should always go via

Re: [DISCUSS] Release principles for Apache CloudStack

Thanks! Appreciate it :-) On 02 Jul 2015, at 13:51, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: be sure you're backed On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Remi Bergsma r...@remi.nl wrote: Hi all, We already agreed contributions should always go via a PR and require two LGTM’s before we

Re: [DISCUSS] LTS releases?

Bug fixing in older releases is actually a lot of work. For security related issues we could maybe do it. Personally, I prefer to have a fast release cycle and smooth (tested) upgrade paths over 2-year LTS release cycle. It's more agile. As a bonus, people get the new features. The more

Re: [DISCUSS] Release principles for Apache CloudStack

and if he foresees any issues if we'd switch to a release tag instead (and branch off of it once vote passes). Regards, Remi On 02 Jul 2015, at 16:16, Rene Moser m...@renemoser.net wrote: Hi Remi On 02.07.2015 13:46, Remi Bergsma wrote: I talked to several people over the past weeks and wrote

Re: [DISCUSS] Release principles for Apache CloudStack

regression bugs. I will update the diagram and wiki later tonight. While reviewing PRs, let’s be alert to see PRs not pointed towards master and at least discuss it. Regards, Remi On 2 jul. 2015, at 16:54, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 2:29 PM, Remi Bergsma r

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Karen Voung as a new PMC member of CloudStack

Congratulations Karen! :-) On 02 Jul 2015, at 20:15, John Burwell john.burw...@shapeblue.com wrote: All, The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack are pleased to announce that Karen Voung (karenv) has accepted our invitation to join the PMC. Please join me in

Re: [DISCUSS] 4.5.2 bugfix sprint

Hi Rohit, Could you see if you can add this bug fix as well? It fixes the X-Forwarded-For header in HAProxy. https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/549 Thanks, Remi On 25 jun. 2015, at 21:35, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Hi all, Now that 4.4.4 has passed, I would

Re: IRC and Slack

What if we use the best of both worlds, by using something like [1]? We obviously need to dive a bit into this and see how well it works. There might be alternatives. The benefit of such a solution would be that if you could see messages on IRC in Slack and v.v. that would make them more

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Wilder Rodrigues as a new PMC member of CloudStack

Awesome news Wilder! :-) Sent from my iPhone On 01 Jul 2015, at 19:12, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack are pleased to announce that Wilder Rodrigues (ekho) has accepted our invitation to join the PMC. Please

Re: [PROPOSAL] Commit to master through PR only

Let’s do it! Starting tomorrow we’ll commit to master through PR only (as described below), and we’ll evaluate this at Sept 30, 2015. I’ll put a reminder in my schedule to start the thread. Regards, Remi On 26 jun. 2015, at 23:10, Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com wrote: date :=

Re: [PROPOSAL] Commit to master through PR only

Good point Daan, I like it! 2015-06-25 16:49 GMT+02:00 Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com: I still don't think travis is reliable enough to give a definite 'no'. Two LGTMs is fine and a good argument if travis is red on why this is not a problem for this case. On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at

Re: Build environment stability

+1! Thanks guys :-) On 22 Jun 2015, at 07:38, Rajani Karuturi raj...@apache.org wrote: Thanks for all the hard work Rafeal and Daan. much needed fixes. ~Rajani On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 2:35 AM, Rafael Fonseca rsafons...@gmail.com wrote: Hi all, Sorry for the 100+ SPAM mails from

Re: [VOTE] release candidate 4.4.4 (4.4-RC20150618T1117)

Hi Daan, Thanks for fixing and testing it! After DevOpsDays Ams I will also give it a go. I can prepare a PR for the release notes and document the new setting. You can then merge it when the release passes. Or should we do this in another way? Regards, Remi On 22 Jun 2015, at 16:35, Daan

Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-8545 make reboot on out of ban...

Thanks for picking this up! LGTM, I'll try to test it tomorrow. One comment: I'd propose the setting name to reflect 'out of band'. Now it looks like when you migrate a router in ACS it will also reboot. router.reboot.when.outofband.migrated? Regards, Remi Sent from my iPhone On 16 Jun

Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Allow test to run on tiny linux templates...

LGTM, will try to give it a test drive today. Thanks! Sent from my iPhone On 10 Jun 2015, at 11:17, isoutham g...@git.apache.org wrote: GitHub user isoutham opened a pull request: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/381 Allow test to run on tiny linux templates using

Re: 4.6

Hi, I can jump in and work with Rohit and Daan to make 4.6 happen. +1 for the QA on master. It would be best if we could then all focus on stabilizing 4.6 aka master and wait with refactor stuff and new features until 4.6 is out, which is the start of 4.7. On the other hand, building new

Re: [DISCUSS] Out of Band VR migration, should we reboot VR or not?

+1 On 04 Jun 2015, at 14:29, Rohit Yadav rohit.ya...@shapeblue.commailto:rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com wrote: Hi, On 04-Jun-2015, at 11:05 am, Remi Bergsma rberg...@schubergphilis.commailto:rberg...@schubergphilis.com wrote: To summarise: #1. rebooting VR is needed for hypervisors that have

Re: [DISCUSS] Out of Band VR migration, should we reboot VR or not?

To summarise: #1. rebooting VR is needed for hypervisors that have their own DR (like VMware and Hyperv) as a restart outside of CloudStack makes it lose its config hence the VR is unavailable #2. rebooting is NOT needed for successful live migrations on _any_ hypervisor (since there was no

Re: [DISCUSS] Out of Band VR migration, should we reboot VR or not?

This is a VMware specific problem, right? We could also limit the fix to this hypervisor only. Regards, Remi On 03 Jun 2015, at 14:12, Koushik Das koushik@citrix.commailto:koushik@citrix.com wrote: In case the VR is moved out of band (say as part of Vmware DRS), all network rules are

Re: [DISCUSS] Out of Band VR migration, should we reboot VR or not?

Hi all, If I understand correctly, this is also in 4.4.3 (and the upcoming 4.4.4). The report on user list: http://markmail.org/message/nth7qck27s2chwoc?q=VMsync+issues+with+VRs%3Fhttp://markmail.org/message/nth7qck27s2chwoc?q=VMsync+issues+with+VRs? As VPCs are non-redundant, a sudden reboot

Re: [DISCUSS] Out of Band VR migration, should we reboot VR or not?

specific checks in the orchestration/API layers. I am not sure if the problem is specific to Vmware. Any out of band VR movement can lead to this issue. For now it is seen in Vmware but what about other HVs where CS relies on native HA provided by HV. -Original Message- From: Remi

Re: [DISCUSS] Out of Band VR migration, should we reboot VR or not?

-9989334676 sudhansu.s...@citrix.com mailto:%20sudhansu.s...@citrix.com http://www.citrix.com Powering mobile workstyles and cloud services On 03/06/15 5:35 pm, Remi Bergsma rberg...@schubergphilis.com wrote: Hi all, If I understand correctly, this is also in 4.4.3

Re: [DISCUSS] Out of Band VR migration, should we reboot VR or not?

Hi all, I just had a look at this more closely and had a chat with Ian about it. The only way for the original problem to happen (losing iptables rules) is if the live migrate would fail and the hypervisor rebooted the vm. The cause is the non-persistance of the router configuration, which is

Re: [VOTE] release candidate 4.4.4

I'd say, as a default: 4.4.0 will be nice for any 4.4.x release, and 4.5.0 for 4.5.x etc. This is also close to what was hard-coded before. Regards, Remi 2015-06-01 11:33 GMT+02:00 Daan Hoogland daan.hoogl...@gmail.com: Guess we'll be making a new rc. The value can be 0.0.0 for my part, it

Re: [VOTE] release candidate 4.4.4

Hi Milamber, It is a global setting, although it appears not to be present in the cloud.configuration table by default (so you cannot find it). If you insert it, it works. I also played with the upgrade and did insert the setting, since at work we had changed the minimal version to a non

Re: [VOTE] release candidate 4.4.4

in database exists since 4.4.2? @Daan, Probably it would be better to fix this before the 4.4.4 release? Milamber On 31/05/2015 17:07, Remi Bergsma wrote: Hi Milamber, It is a global setting, although it appears not to be present in the cloud.configuration table by default (so

Shall we soon do a 4.5.2 release?

Hi guys, I've been playing with KVM on CentOS 7.1 and found it does not work well with 4.5.1 due to a problem that Rohit already solved last week (thanks!). See PR: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/290 Shall we do a new 4.5 release in the coming week or so? Then we can benefit from some

Re: Shall we soon do a 4.5.2 release?

;) if no further issues come up Or do we want a 4.5.2 irrespective and simultaneous? Op vr 29 mei 2015 om 14:25 schreef Wido den Hollander w...@widodh.nl: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/29/2015 02:20 PM, Remi Bergsma wrote: Hi guys, I've been playing with KVM

Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: Fix agent/management conflict

Looks like asfgit only closes PRs when we commit to master branch and not to any another one. Can we maybe ask for some more branches to be monitored, like 4.4 and 4.5 etc. Would save manual work. Regards, Remi Sent from my iPhone On 29 May 2015, at 21:01, bhaisaab g...@git.apache.org

Re: [DISCUSS] XenServer and HA: the way forward

warnings if it isn't / something? -- Stephen Turner [*] http://blog.remibergsma.com/2015/05/23/making-xenserver-and-cloudstack-sing-and-dance-together-again/ -Original Message- From: Remi Bergsma [mailto:r...@remi.nl] Sent: 04 May 2015 11:04 To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject

Re: [GitHub] cloudstack pull request: CLOUDSTACK-8339: Allow non-root users to ...

Hi Rohit, Just merged your PR to 4.5 and the commit is shown here. LGTM. https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commit/d2b0c1a32b2d8719eafd6d4574de9a824d46d290 It’s just that your PR did not get closed. Is there anything I should have done to make this happen? Thanks for the advice. Regards,

Re: IPv6 ideas for Basic Networking

At Schuberg Philis we’ve been working on a design voor IPv6 in VPC networks (so this is Advanced Networking) and I indeed had a look at your functional spec. I’ll finalise what we’ve come up with and publish it early next week so we can align and discuss and work from there. Nice to see there

Re: [ACS44]release 4.4.4?

Hi Andrija, Here you go: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/281 ;-) @Daan, please check if it looks OK to you. Regards, Remi On 21 May 2015, at 18:29, Andrija Panic andrija.pa...@gmail.commailto:andrija.pa...@gmail.com wrote: Daan, I'm not so sure I can pull this in short time frame

Re: support for /31 Networks

? Regards, Remi 2015-05-21 17:31 GMT+02:00 Remi Bergsma r...@remi.nl: Hi, This question was answered here as well: http://markmail.org/message/m7vi342uwm4zr5iv Support was removed as /31 has no available ip addresses. Regards, Remi 2015-05-21 16:42 GMT+02:00 Ian Southam isout

Re: support for /31 Networks

: You can assigned the network address as a valid ip address from a /31, and this is defined in RFC 3021 (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3021.txt). This is widely supported on network gear, and in modern operating systems. - Si From: Remi Bergsma r

Re: support for /31 Networks

Hi, This question was answered here as well: http://markmail.org/message/m7vi342uwm4zr5iv Support was removed as /31 has no available ip addresses. Regards, Remi 2015-05-21 16:42 GMT+02:00 Ian Southam isout...@schubergphilis.com: Hi Devender, You have started quite a discussion in our

Re: [UPDATE] 2015 progress

Great update, great vibes. Like! Regards, Remi 2015-05-19 15:38 GMT+02:00 sebgoa run...@gmail.com: Hi folks, Couple months ago I shared a few thoughts for 2015 [1], things that we could do to make our project even greater. There has been good progress, so I would like to share a few

Re: VMware NSX (former Nicira NVP) with Cloudstack and vSphere

: Remi Bergsma rberg...@schubergphilis.com To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org dev@cloudstack.apache.org Cc: Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2015 5:19 PM Subject: Re: VMware NSX (former Nicira NVP) with Cloudstack and vSphere Interesting, didn’t know that! :-) On 05 May 2015, at 14:28, Funs Kessen f

Re: libvirt exception

On Fri, 8 May 2015 16:02 Mike C mcrosson_cloudst...@nusku.net wrote: On 2015-05-07 16:41, Daan Hoogland wrote: But if your patient I'll get there. I'm here to see it through to the end ;) The good news is Remi's note worked. I've included output below. On 2015-05-07 16:42, Remi Bergsma

Re: VMware NSX (former Nicira NVP) with Cloudstack and vSphere

Interesting, didn’t know that! :-) On 05 May 2015, at 14:28, Funs Kessen f...@barred.org wrote: Hi, For the record, VMware nsx-mh not VMware nsx-vsphere, as they are different products. Cheers, Funs On Tuesday, May 5, 2015, Remi Bergsma rberg...@schubergphilis.com wrote: Hi

<    1   2   3   4   >