Mike,
It is possible to do this on vcenter, but it requires a special license I believe. Here's the info on it : https://pubs.vmware.com/vsphere-51/index.jsp#com.vmware.vsphere.vcenterhost.doc/GUID-A16BA123-403C-4D13-A581-DC4062E11165.html https://pubs.vmware.com/vsphere-51/index.jsp#com.vmware.vsphere.vcenterhost.doc/GUID-561681D9-6511-44DF-B169-F20E6CA94944.html - Si ________________________________ From: Tutkowski, Mike <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2017 3:09 PM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: Re: Cannot migrate VMware VM with root disk to host in different cluster (CloudStack 4.10) This is interesting: If I shut the VM down and then migrate its root disk to storage in the other cluster, then start up the VM, the VM gets started up correctly (running on the new host using the other datastore). Perhaps you simply cannot live migrate a VM and its storage from one cluster to another with VMware? This works for XenServer and I probably just assumed it would work in VMware, but maybe it doesn’t? The reason I’m asking now is because I’m investigating the support of cross-cluster migration of a VM that uses managed storage. This works for XenServer as of 4.9 and I was looking to implement similar functionality for VMware. On 3/23/17, 2:01 PM, "Tutkowski, Mike" <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> wrote: Another piece of info: I tried this same VM + storage migration using NFS for both datastores instead of iSCSI for both datastores and it failed with the same error message: Required property datastore is missing from data object of type VirtualMachineRelocateSpecDiskLocator while parsing serialized DataObject of type vim.vm.RelocateSpec.DiskLocator at line 1, column 326 while parsing property "disk" of static type ArrayOfVirtualMachineRelocateSpecDiskLocator while parsing serialized DataObject of type vim.vm.RelocateSpec at line 1, column 187 while parsing call information for method RelocateVM_Task at line 1, column 110 while parsing SOAP body at line 1, column 102 while parsing SOAP envelope at line 1, column 38 while parsing HTTP request for method relocate on object of type vim.VirtualMachine at line 1, column 0 On 3/23/17, 12:33 PM, "Tutkowski, Mike" <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> wrote: Slight typo: Both ESXi hosts are version 5.5 and both clusters are within the same VMware datastore. Should be (datastore changed to datacenter): Both ESXi hosts are version 5.5 and both clusters are within the same VMware datacenter. On 3/23/17, 12:31 PM, "Tutkowski, Mike" <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> wrote: A little update here: In the debugger, I made sure we asked for the correct source datastore (I edited the UUID we were using for the source datastore). When VirtualMachineMO.changeDatastore is later invoked having the proper source and target datastores, I now see this error message: Virtual disk 'Hard disk 1' is not accessible on the host: Unable to access file [SIOC-1] Both ESXi hosts are version 5.5 and both clusters are within the same VMware datastore. The source datastore and the target datastore are both using iSCSI. On 3/23/17, 11:53 AM, "Tutkowski, Mike" <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> wrote: Also, in case it matters, both datastores are iSCSI based. > On Mar 23, 2017, at 11:52 AM, Tutkowski, Mike <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> wrote: > > My version is 5.5 in both clusters. > >> On Mar 23, 2017, at 9:48 AM, Sateesh Chodapuneedi <sateesh.chodapune...@accelerite.com> wrote: >> >> >>>> On 23/03/17, 7:21 PM, "Tutkowski, Mike" <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> wrote: >> >>>> However, perhaps someone can clear this up for me: >>>> With XenServer, we are able to migrate a VM and its volumes from a host using a shared SR in one cluster to a host using a shared SR in another cluster even though the source host can’t see the target SR. >>>> Is the same thing possible with VMware or does the source host have to be able to see the target datastore? If so, does that mean the target datastore has to be zone-wide primary storage when using VMware to make this work? >> Yes, Mike. But that’s the case with versions less than 5.1 only. In vSphere 5.1 and later, vMotion does not require environments with shared storage. This is useful for performing cross-cluster migrations, when the target cluster machines might not have access to the source cluster's storage. >> BTW, what is the version of ESXi hosts in this setup? >> >> Regards, >> Sateesh, >> CloudStack development, >> Accelerite, CA-95054 >> >> On 3/23/17, 7:47 AM, "Tutkowski, Mike" <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> wrote: >> >> This looks a little suspicious to me (in VmwareResource before we call VirtualMachineMO.changeDatastore): >> >> morDsAtTarget = HypervisorHostHelper.findDatastoreWithBackwardsCompatibility(tgtHyperHost, filerTo.getUuid()); >> morDsAtSource = HypervisorHostHelper.findDatastoreWithBackwardsCompatibility(srcHyperHost, filerTo.getUuid()); >> if (morDsAtTarget == null) { >> String msg = "Unable to find the target datastore: " + filerTo.getUuid() + " on target host: " + tgtHyperHost.getHyperHostName() + " to execute MigrateWithStorageCommand"; >> s_logger.error(msg); >> throw new Exception(msg); >> } >> >> We use filerTo.getUuid() when trying to get a pointer to both the target and source datastores. Since filerTo.getUuid() has the UUID for the target datastore, that works for morDsAtTarget, but morDsAtSource ends up being null. >> >> For some reason, we only check if morDsAtTarget is null (I’m not sure why we don’t check if morDsAtSource is null, too). >> >> On 3/23/17, 7:31 AM, "Tutkowski, Mike" <mike.tutkow...@netapp.com> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> The CloudStack API that the GUI is invoking is migrateVirtualMachineWithVolume (which is expected since I’m asking to migrate a VM from a host in one cluster to a host in another cluster). >> >> A MigrateWithStorageCommand is sent to VmwareResource, which eventually calls VirtualMachineMO.changeDatastore. >> >> public boolean changeDatastore(VirtualMachineRelocateSpec relocateSpec) throws Exception { >> ManagedObjectReference morTask = _context.getVimClient().getService().relocateVMTask(_mor, relocateSpec, VirtualMachineMovePriority.DEFAULT_PRIORITY); >> boolean result = _context.getVimClient().waitForTask(morTask); >> if (result) { >> _context.waitForTaskProgressDone(morTask); >> return true; >> } else { >> s_logger.error("VMware RelocateVM_Task to change datastore failed due to " + TaskMO.getTaskFailureInfo(_context, morTask)); >> } >> return false; >> } >> >> The parameter, VirtualMachineRelocateSpec, looks like this: >> >> http://imgur.com/a/vtKcq (datastore-66 is the target datastore) >> >> The following error message is returned: >> >> Required property datastore is missing from data object of type VirtualMachineRelocateSpecDiskLocator >> >> while parsing serialized DataObject of type vim.vm.RelocateSpec.DiskLocator >> at line 1, column 327 >> >> while parsing property "disk" of static type ArrayOfVirtualMachineRelocateSpecDiskLocator >> >> while parsing serialized DataObject of type vim.vm.RelocateSpec >> at line 1, column 187 >> >> while parsing call information for method RelocateVM_Task >> at line 1, column 110 >> >> while parsing SOAP body >> at line 1, column 102 >> >> while parsing SOAP envelope >> at line 1, column 38 >> >> while parsing HTTP request for method relocate >> on object of type vim.VirtualMachine >> at line 1, column 0 >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Thanks! >> Mike >> >> On 3/22/17, 11:50 PM, "Sergey Levitskiy" <sergey.levits...@autodesk.com> wrote: >> >> >> Can you trace which API call being used and what parameters were specified? migrateVirtualMachineWithVolumeAttempts vs migrateVirtualMachine >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> DISCLAIMER >> ========== >> This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which is the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, retain, copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept any liability for virus infected mails.
