THere's literally hundreds of other features that work just fine on XCP/Xen. What you are complaining against is the nature of time-based releases. The drag from 4.1 is jeopardizing 4.2, 4.3, etc, making a mockery of our stated goal of 3 releases a year.
There's developers who had to pull out their features from 4.1 because it wasn't ready by 1/31. Nobody whined asking for a couple more weeks. And that was the right thing to do. Now we have developers racing to meet the 5/31 deadline for 4.2 and they are being dragged into the quagmire of 4.1, which is a perfectly fine release for 99% of the users out there. On 5/21/13 7:39 PM, "Outback Dingo" <outbackdi...@gmail.com> wrote: >On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Chiradeep Vittal < >chiradeep.vit...@citrix.com> wrote: > >> Outback, it would be helpful to understand the harm you are facing >>without >> this fix. >> Are you operating a CloudStack cloud already? Have you lost Vms/ lost >>data >> / faced unexplained crashes, or found your cloud unavailable due to >>this? >> Note that this bug has been there since 2.2 >> >> >It would break a current migration path to s3 storage capabilities >currently being rolled out for XEN based hypervisors >as it was mentioned in the thread. This negates our and others >capabilities >to be inline with other Hypervisors, and >having to wait until a fix/patch can be applied. It also negates current >infrastructure design for commercial >and private clouds based on XEN/XCP for a more robust storage >infrastructure then is currently capable. > >IMHO, aside from the technical details, your basically telling all XEN >infrastructure, too bad. no new s3 infrastructure for you, from my >perspective this is both bad practice, and again, leaves XEN/XCP users >wanting, and waiting again..... > > >> On 5/21/13 5:59 PM, "Outback Dingo" <outbackdi...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Chip Childers >> ><chip.child...@sungard.com>wrote: >> > >> >> All, >> >> >> >> As discussed on another thread [1], we identified a bug >> >> (CLOUDSTACK-2492) in the current 3.x system VMs, where the System VMs >> >> are not configured to sync their time with either the host HV or an >>NTP >> >> service. That bug affects the system VMs for all three primary HVs >> >>(KVM, >> >> Xen and vSphere). Patches have been committed addressing vSphere and >> >> KVM. It appears that a correction for Xen would require the >>re-build of >> >> a system VM image and a full round of regression testing that image. >> >> >> >> Given that the discussion thread has not resulted in a consensus on >>this >> >> issue, I unfortunately believe that the only path forward is to call >>for >> >> a formal VOTE. >> >> >> >> Please respond with one of the following: >> >> >> >> +1: proceed with 4.1 without the Xen portion of CLOUDSTACK-2492 being >> >> resolved >> >> +0: don't care one way or the other >> >> -1: do *not* proceed with any further 4.1 release candidates until >> >> CLOUDSTACK-2492 has been fully resolved >> >> >> >> >> >-1 do *not* proceed >> > >> > >> >> -chip >> >> >> >> [1] http://markmail.org/message/rw7vciq3r33biasb >> >> >> >>
