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
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 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/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/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-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/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-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/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-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/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/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/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/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/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/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/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/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/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-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/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/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 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/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/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/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/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/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/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/1747
@rafaelweingartner Do we get you LGTM?
@DaanHoogland @rhtyd Can we kick off tests for this?
---
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/1727
@koushik-das @rhtyd @rafaelweingartner Can you review changes @nvazquez
put in place? CI tests are good.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1767
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/1727
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/1747
@rafaelweingartner This PR is two fold.
1. This is something that was done a long ago for hosts and was never
implemented for storage. It transitions location of of storage tags over
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1747
@rafaelweingartner 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 not have
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1833
@pdumbre I confirm your observation. LGTM on 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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1711
Yes it is in 4.9.2.
---
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 issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1727
@rhtyd @karuturi Can we run tests on this PR and merge on success ?
---
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/1747
@rhtyd @karuturi Can we run tests on this PR and merge on success ?
---
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/1767
@karuturi Can we merge 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 does not have this feature
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1905
@rhtyd @karuturi Can we run tests on this PR and merge on success ?
---
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/1913
@rhtyd @karuturi Can we run vmware tests on this PR and merge on success ?
---
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/1773
@priyankparihar A part is still missing that will use forced option in UI
but give a user option to cancel deletion if active VMs exist
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1773
@ustcweizhou @priyankparihar @borisstoyanov The default behavior was always
equivalent of force=true. We seem to agree that the UI behavior should remain
forced=true but with extra warning. We
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1847
@nvazquez @rhtyd @anshul1886 We might need to tweak the test_data.py to add
additional nfs mount e.g. nfs1 and use it in this test. E.g adding
"nfs1": {
"u
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1773
@priyankparihar @ustcweizhou There seems to be just one case where it will
affect resetVM operations. If template is deleted and root disk is migrated to
another PS where there is no template
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1813
@priyankparihar Resize test still fails on vmware. It is hard to see the
reason in blueorangutain output but you might want to make sure the test
provisioning uses full clones via setting
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1961
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 a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1958#discussion_r102753237
--- Diff: server/src/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManagerImpl.java
---
@@ -508,7 +507,7 @@ public String updateConfiguration(final long userId
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1941
@borisstoyanov @rhtyd Can we re-test this with B.O. ?
---
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/1961
@karuturi I agree with @nvazquez . This PR can be safely merged and then
B.O. runtime environment needs to be adjusted to define nfs2 mountpoint in
test_data.py
---
If your project is set up
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1935
@rafaelweingartner Can you review latest updates from @nvazquez . Since
tests are passing this PR will be ready for merging to 4.10
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1773
@priyankparihar I agree with @ustcweizhou . Default behavior should remain
forced. And in this case Web UI we should give a warning with "yes and no" if
template has deployed VM so
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1768
@marcaurele I tend to agree with @rhtydthat it could break some of the
upgrades. If I get it right with your proposed changes, upgrade scripts become
obsolete since all the changes can be done
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1773
@jburwell That was default behavior for few years to allow deletion of the
template even if active VMs exist. Deletion of the template on secondary
doesn't remove the template copy on primary
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1847
@karuturi @anshul1886 Can we tweak line 278 of test_snaphsot.py from
self.services["nfs"],
to self.services["nfs2"],
and re-merge this PR so
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1773
@priyankparihar Well. API use cases can be recoded but not UI. Presently we
can delete templates in UI even with active VMs. With your changes there will
be no recourse. An easy option
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/927
@karuturi
Smoke test test_internal_lb.py uses a value of
network.loadbalancer.haproxy.stats.auth which is encrypted for haproxy checks.
settings["username"]
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1727
@karuturi This one is ready for merging. Two LGTMs + tests passing on all 3
hypervisors
---
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/1747
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/1747
@karuturi Test passed. Two LGTM received. Looks like it is ready for merging
---
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/1727
@DaanHoogland @borisstoyanov @rhtyd Guys can you kick off tests for 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
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1913
@karuturi This one is ready for merging. LGTM and test results are positive.
---
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/1913
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/1813
@priyankparihar You need to adjust smoke test test_deploy_vm_root_resize.py
to support vmware root resize. Otherwise it will keep failing
2017-02-15 12:48:59,150 - CRITICAL - FAILED
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1813
@borisstoyanov Looks like some environmental issues with backend NFS. Can
you kick it again for vmware ?
u'2017-02-15T20:21:38+', jobresult : {errorcode : 530, errortext :
u'Failed
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1727
@borisstoyanov @DaanHoogland @rhtyd KVM tests passed but key smoke test is
skipped
test_change_service_offering_for_vm_with_snapshots Skipped
To be on the safe side can we test
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1727
@nvazquez Since 4.9.2 is already released and this is not a bugfix the DB
changes should go to schema-490to4910.sql
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
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/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/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/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/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/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/1773
Thanks @priyankparihar . We verified in our environment that all is working
fine including UI part.
LGTM
I think this one is
tag:mergeready
---
If your project is set up
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1813
@rhtyd @borisstoyanov @DaanHoogland Can we get B.O. management server log
to check why exception is generated?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
Github user serg38 commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1813#discussion_r103719599
--- Diff: server/src/com/cloud/vm/UserVmManagerImpl.java ---
@@ -3614,6 +3604,26 @@ public UserVmVO doInTransaction(TransactionStatus
status) throws
Github user serg38 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1935
@rhtyd @karuturi To fix errors in B.O in
test_02_list_snapshots_with_removed_data_store we need to merge PR1961 and then
adjust test_data on B.O side to have correct mapping for nfs2 label
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
@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/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/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/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/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/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/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
1 - 100 of 295 matches
Mail list logo
