The problem is that systemvm.iso is built with java 8 whereas java on the
VR is java 7
On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 13:20 Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com> wrote:

> Did it work after resetting a VPC or when blowing away the SSVM or CPVM?  I
> would not expect the SSVM or the CPVM to come up if the management server
> was built with JDK8 and the system vm template is only using JDK7.  Can you
> confirm?​
>
> *Will STEVENS*
> Lead Developer
>
> <https://goo.gl/NYZ8KK>
>
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 1:15 PM, Wei ZHOU <ustcweiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > We've tested management server 4.7.1 with ubuntu 16.04/openjdk8 and
> > systemvm 4.6 with debian7/openjdk7.
> > The systemvms (ssvm, cpvm) work fine.
> >
> > I agree we need consider the openjdk upgrade in systemvm template.
> >
> > -Wei
> >
> > 2017-02-20 18:15 GMT+01:00 Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com>:
> >
> > > Regarding my question. Is it because of the version of Java that the
> > > systemvm.iso is built on?
> > >
> > > On Feb 20, 2017 11:58 AM, "Will Stevens" <wstev...@cloudops.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > A question that is hidden in here is:
> > > > - Why does the JDK version on the management server have to match the
> > JDK
> > > > version of the System VM?
> > > >
> > > > *Will STEVENS*
> > > > Lead Developer
> > > >
> > > > <https://goo.gl/NYZ8KK>
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Pierre-Luc Dion <
> pd...@cloudops.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Hi,
> > > >>
> > > >> In the context of deployment of CloudStack with VPCs,
> > > >> What will happen to a cloud when upgrading to 4.10 that now use
> jdk8?
> > > >>
> > > >> Does upgrading the management-server to 4.10 jdk8 and then keep the
> > old
> > > >> VRs
> > > >> run for a while that run on JDK7 will still work ?
> > > >>
> > > >> Because If we upgrade the management-server to jdk8, we need to keep
> > VR
> > > to
> > > >> work until they get upgraded but we can't force an upgrade of VR
> just
> > > >> because the management-server is now using JDK8.
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to