+1, but we need to test different HV+storage combinations...that is some effort.
On Tue, 4 Feb 2020 at 13:56, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> wrote: > so having seen the discussions here and on the PR, do we agree to try and > get @Gabriel Beims Bräscher <gabrasc...@gmail.com> 's PR in and leave it > at > that for this release? > > On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 10:10 AM Gabriel Beims Bräscher < > gabrasc...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hello folks, > > > > Just to give you an update. I deployed a XenServer cluster and performed > a > > few tests on PR #3649. After upgrading a 4.13.0.0 Zone with this fix, > > XenServer snapshot was deleted on primary and secondary storage (NFS). > > > > Em seg., 3 de fev. de 2020 às 14:11, Gabriel Beims Bräscher < > > gabrasc...@gmail.com> escreveu: > > > > > I would try as much as possible to have it merged into 4.14. > Considering > > > that it is not simple to map all the garbage snapshots on secondary > > storage. > > > > > > The proposed PR [1] should, in theory, fix also for XenServer. > However, I > > > did not test it for XenServer so far. > > > Today I am deploying a XenServer cluster to check it. If someone else > > > could also hammer that PR and see if it works fine would be great :-) > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/3649 > > > > > > Em seg., 3 de fev. de 2020 às 14:02, Paul Angus < > > paul.an...@shapeblue.com> > > > escreveu: > > > > > >> Thanks. My vote would be that it is a blocker, as there is no way to > > >> clean up and so storage filling up and crashing is a very real > > possibility. > > >> > > >> > > >> paul.an...@shapeblue.com > > >> www.shapeblue.com > > >> Amadeus House, Floral Street, London WC2E 9DPUK > > >> @shapeblue > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Andrija Panic <andrija.pa...@gmail.com> > > >> Sent: 03 February 2020 16:58 > > >> To: dev <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > > >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] blocker issue 3646 for 4.14/4.13.1 > > >> > > >> I believe not - i.e. you can go and delete the files manually (but in > > >> some cases there is also records not properly removed from the > > >> snapshots_store_ref, for either primary or secondary kind, which makes > > it > > >> more complicated...) > > >> > > >> I can see Simon has asked his colleague to check it (comments on PR) - > > >> fingers crossed. > > >> > > >> On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 at 17:37, Paul Angus <paul.an...@shapeblue.com> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> > Is there any kind of workaround or way to 'force' snapshots to be > > >> > cleaned up (that doesn't create inconsistencies in CloudStack's view > > >> > of the world vs the physical world? > > >> > > > >> > paul.an...@shapeblue.com > > >> > www.shapeblue.com > > >> > Amadeus House, Floral Street, London WC2E 9DPUK @shapeblue > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -----Original Message----- > > >> > From: Andrija Panic <andrija.pa...@gmail.com> > > >> > Sent: 03 February 2020 16:35 > > >> > To: dev <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > > >> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] blocker issue 3646 for 4.14/4.13.1 > > >> > > > >> > This issue is here from before (i.e. not new to 4.14), so we can > argue > > >> > it's not technically a blocker due to regression happening in some > > >> previous > > >> > release, and I can live with it being moved to 4.15. > > >> > > > >> > That being said, would be great to see it solved if this rings any > > bells > > >> > for anyone who might have played with the related code... > > >> > > > >> > On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 at 13:21, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com > > > > >> > wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > People, > > >> > > A ticket has been raised as a blocker but i don't think anybody > here > > >> > > has the resources to fix it. It is a regression of kinds, and a > > known > > >> > > issue but in my not so humble opinion won't block anybody from > > using a > > >> > > future release. The Issue [1] describes the problem and a PR [2] > > gives > > >> > > a partial solution. It is known to work for a KVM/Ceph environment > > and > > >> > > thus might be to specific. > > >> > > > > >> > > I move that we either > > >> > > 1. find the PR that caused this and revert it, and/or 2. postpone > > >> > > fixing it till after 4.14 (unless someone has the resources and > > >> > > volunteers to address it) and as an ugly workaround (creating a > cron > > >> > > job for your env that deletes stale images) exists, unmark it as > > >> > > blocker. > > >> > > > > >> > > [1] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/3646 > > >> > > [2] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/3649 > > >> > > > > >> > > any comments, please? > > >> > > -- > > >> > > Daan > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > > > >> > Andrija Panić > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> > > >> Andrija Panić > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > Daan > -- Andrija Panić
