Review Request 28535: core project can not pass junit test on mac platform .

[tian chunfeng]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/
---

Review request for cloudstack.


Repository: cloudstack-git


Description
---

run test on core failed : Change firewall rule set from HashSet to TreeSet 
because HashSet elements are not ordered , which will cause test failed when  
elements toArray are not same between windows and mac . 


Diffs
-

  core/src/com/cloud/agent/api/routing/SetFirewallRulesCommand.java be85887 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/diff/


Testing
---

after ensure the firewall rule set in TreeSet , toArray will the same order 
accross windows and mac platform, and passed test.


Thanks,

tian chunfeng

Re: root resize support in the UI

[Nux!]

BTW, the code needed to enable custom root size during instance creation is 
very small, functionality is already there.
This patch is needed 
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=commit;h=8fec09ba481fbd3b8c2a9e4d31ef06f113b037cb
 , I tested it and it works fine.

And this is the result: https://i.imgur.com/xrs0mu4.png

--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro

- Original Message -
> From: "Nux!" 
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: "Brian Federle" 
> Sent: Saturday, 29 November, 2014 00:57:37
> Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI

> Yes, you have a point.
> 
> Opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-7992
> 
> --
> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> 
> Nux!
> www.nux.ro
> 
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Mike Tutkowski" 
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Cc: "Brian Federle" 
>> Sent: Saturday, 29 November, 2014 00:48:03
>> Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
> 
>> Well...I don't know...we kind of have features all over the place that work
>> for one hypervisor and not for another.
>> 
>> If we're cool with that approach, this would be just one more area where we
>> have this kind of hypervisor-specific behavior (perhaps all hypervisors
>> support such an action in the future).
>> 
>> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Nux!  wrote:
>> 
>>> Was thinking to just patch my local installation. Devs might not go too
>>> crazy over this idea since root resize is not supported across all
>>> hypervisors (KVM only atm).
>>>
>>> But if you think this has a chance to go official, I will open an issue.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Lucian
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>>>
>>> Nux!
>>> www.nux.ro
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>> > From: "Mike Tutkowski" 
>>> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org, "Brian Federle" >> >
>>> > Sent: Saturday, 29 November, 2014 00:27:14
>>> > Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
>>>
>>> > Have you logged a JIRA ticket for this?
>>> >
>>> > Maybe Brian or one of the GUI people could pick up on it.
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Nux!  wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Yeah, I was thinking of that, if it works for DATA, it should work for
>>> >> ROOT. But I am not a dev.
>>> >>
>>> >> Thoughts?
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>>> >>
>>> >> Nux!
>>> >> www.nux.ro
>>> >>
>>> >> - Original Message -
>>> >> > From: "Mike Tutkowski" 
>>> >> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> >> > Sent: Friday, 28 November, 2014 19:57:27
>>> >> > Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
>>> >>
>>> >> > For root disks, is it possible to just follow the existing resize
>>> pattern
>>> >> > we have established in the UI for data disks?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Friday, November 28, 2014, Nux!  wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> Hello,
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Wonder if someone can help me with the $subject.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I remember at some point (4.2?) a new feature showed up accidentally
>>> in
>>> >> >> the UI instance creation dialogues, it was concerning "root size",
>>> had a
>>> >> >> small box where the number in GB would be introduced.
>>> >> >> I'd like to take advantage of that now that this feature actually
>>> works,
>>> >> >> even if only in KVM. I'd love it if someone could point me to that
>>> >> piece of
>>> >> >> code (prolly just javascript).
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> In addition to that, now that root resize works, can any one suggest
>>> >> how I
>>> >> >> might put a "resize" button in the Volumes section for the ROOT
>>> disks?
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Lucian
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> --
>>> >> >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Nux!
>>> >> >> www.nux.ro
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > *Mike Tutkowski*
>>> >> > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>>> >> > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>>> >> > o: 303.746.7302
>>> >> > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
>>> >> > *™*
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > *Mike Tutkowski*
>>> > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>>> > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>>> > o: 303.746.7302
>>> > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
>>> > *™*
>>>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> *Mike Tutkowski*
>> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> o: 303.746.7302
>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> > *™*

RE: Random placing of Snapshots on multiple Secondary Storages

[Wadia, Yohan]

Hi,

Can anyone help me with this?

-Original Message-
From: Wadia, Yohan [mailto:ywa...@virtela.net] 
Sent: 28 November 2014 15:25
To: 'dev@cloudstack.apache.org'
Subject: Random placing of Snapshots on multiple Secondary Storages

Hi

I have a Cloudstack 4.2 setup running in my Lab.. 1 Zone with 1 XenServer 6.1 
host and 1 Secondary Storage (NFS)..

The space on this secondary storage is approx 60 GB..

I am planning to add a second Secondary Storage to the Zone (NFS : 200GB) and 
want to dedicate this new Sec Store as the default place to store the volume 
snapshots of my instances..

Cloudstack however places snapshots on both the Sec Stores randomly, so my 
question is that can this randomness be changed?? If yes, then where and how??

Regards,
Yohan

Re: [ACS44]release 4.4.2 release candidate RC20141121T0341 (#2)

[Pierre-Luc Dion]

For the RN, does 4.4.2 require to have a new systemvm ? otherwise the
upgrade path from 4.4.1 to 4.4.2 will not include system vm upgrade steps.
 make sense?

I've tested 4.4.2. using 4.4.1 system vm and so far I don't see any issues.


Thanks,



On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Daan Hoogland 
wrote:

> great Wilder, sound like we're all green :-)
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Wilder Rodrigues
>  wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > Tests results for ACS 4.4.2.
> >
> > I will also do the same tests, but using a dump from our betacloud
> database.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Wilder
> >
> > Environment:
> >
> > * XenServer host running on Betacloud (ACS 4.3.0 VMWare zone)
> > * Management server running on MacBook Pro
> > * MySQL Database running on MacBook Pro
> > * System VM:
> jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/4.4/job/cloudstack-4.4-systemvm64/<
> http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/4.4/job/cloudstack-4.4-systemvm64/>
> >
> > Test Accounts
> >
> > Test Create Account and user for that account ... === TestName:
> test_01_create_account | Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test Sub domain allowed to launch VM  when a Domain level zone is
> created ... === TestName: test_01_add_vm_to_subdomain | Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test delete domain without force option ... === TestName:
> test_DeleteDomain | Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test delete domain with force option ... === TestName:
> test_forceDeleteDomain | Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test update admin details ... === TestName: test_updateAdminDetails |
> Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test update domain admin details ... === TestName:
> test_updateDomainAdminDetails | Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test user update API ... === TestName: test_updateUserDetails | Status :
> SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test login API with domain ... === TestName: test_LoginApiDomain |
> Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test if Login API does not return UUID's ... === TestName:
> test_LoginApiUuidResponse | Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> >
> > --
> > Ran 9 tests in 780.740s
> >
> > OK
> >
> > Test VM Life Cycle
> >
> > Test advanced zone virtual router ... === TestName:
> test_advZoneVirtualRouter | Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test Deploy Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_deploy_vm | Status :
> SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test Multiple Deploy Virtual Machine ... === TestName:
> test_deploy_vm_multiple | Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test Stop Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_01_stop_vm | Status :
> SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test Start Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_02_start_vm | Status :
> SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test Reboot Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_03_reboot_vm | Status
> : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test destroy Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_06_destroy_vm |
> Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test recover Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_07_restore_vm |
> Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test migrate VM ... SKIP: At least two hosts should be present in the
> zone for migration
> > Test destroy(expunge) Virtual Machine ... === TestName:
> test_09_expunge_vm | Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> >
> > --
> > Ran 10 tests in 741.803s
> >
> > OK (SKIP=1)
> >
> > Test Create Service Offerings [VMS are also created]
> >
> > Test to create service offering ... === TestName:
> test_01_create_service_offering | Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test to update existing service offering ... === TestName:
> test_02_edit_service_offering | Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test to delete service offering ... === TestName:
> test_03_delete_service_offering | Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> >
> > --
> > Ran 3 tests in 136.911s
> >
> > OK
> >
> > Test Private GW ACLs
> >
> > test_privategw_acl
> (ekholabs.acs.tests.test_privategw_acl.TestPrivateGwACL) ... === TestName:
> test_privategw_acl | Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> >
> > --
> > Ran 1 test in 81.119s
> >
> > OK
> >
> > Test Routers
> >
> > Test router internal advanced zone ... SKIP: Marvin configuration has no
> host credentials to check router services
> > Test restart network ... === TestName: test_03_restart_network_cleanup |
> Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test router basic setup ... === TestName: test_05_router_basic | Status
> : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test router advanced setup ... === TestName: test_06_router_advanced |
> Status : SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test stop router ... === TestName: test_07_stop_router | Status :
> SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test start router ... === TestName: test_08_start_router | Status :
> SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> > Test reboot router ... === TestName: test_09_reboot_router | Status :
> SUCCESS ===
> > ok
> >
> > --
> > Ran 7 tests in 313.247s
> >
> > OK 

RE: root resize support in the UI

[Vadim Kimlaychuk]

Nux,

 Can you give more information about this functionality? I am 
particularly interesting to show to the user this field, but don't know how it 
will work. Particularly is interesting:
1. Does it work for all hypervisors or just KVM?
2. Does it depend on the template root partition (i.e. I have 10G root at 
template and put 5G to desired. Will it work?)
3. This is just UI patch, shouldn't it be activated at the backend as well ?

Thanks,
Vadim

From: Nux! [n...@li.nux.ro]
Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2014 12:37
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Cc: Brian Federle
Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI

BTW, the code needed to enable custom root size during instance creation is 
very small, functionality is already there.
This patch is needed 
https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=commit;h=8fec09ba481fbd3b8c2a9e4d31ef06f113b037cb
 , I tested it and it works fine.

And this is the result: https://i.imgur.com/xrs0mu4.png

--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro

- Original Message -
> From: "Nux!" 
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: "Brian Federle" 
> Sent: Saturday, 29 November, 2014 00:57:37
> Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI

> Yes, you have a point.
>
> Opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-7992
>
> --
> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>
> Nux!
> www.nux.ro
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Mike Tutkowski" 
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Cc: "Brian Federle" 
>> Sent: Saturday, 29 November, 2014 00:48:03
>> Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
>
>> Well...I don't know...we kind of have features all over the place that work
>> for one hypervisor and not for another.
>>
>> If we're cool with that approach, this would be just one more area where we
>> have this kind of hypervisor-specific behavior (perhaps all hypervisors
>> support such an action in the future).
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Nux!  wrote:
>>
>>> Was thinking to just patch my local installation. Devs might not go too
>>> crazy over this idea since root resize is not supported across all
>>> hypervisors (KVM only atm).
>>>
>>> But if you think this has a chance to go official, I will open an issue.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Lucian
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>>>
>>> Nux!
>>> www.nux.ro
>>>
>>> - Original Message -
>>> > From: "Mike Tutkowski" 
>>> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org, "Brian Federle" >> >
>>> > Sent: Saturday, 29 November, 2014 00:27:14
>>> > Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
>>>
>>> > Have you logged a JIRA ticket for this?
>>> >
>>> > Maybe Brian or one of the GUI people could pick up on it.
>>> >
>>> > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Nux!  wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> Yeah, I was thinking of that, if it works for DATA, it should work for
>>> >> ROOT. But I am not a dev.
>>> >>
>>> >> Thoughts?
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>>> >>
>>> >> Nux!
>>> >> www.nux.ro
>>> >>
>>> >> - Original Message -
>>> >> > From: "Mike Tutkowski" 
>>> >> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> >> > Sent: Friday, 28 November, 2014 19:57:27
>>> >> > Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
>>> >>
>>> >> > For root disks, is it possible to just follow the existing resize
>>> pattern
>>> >> > we have established in the UI for data disks?
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Friday, November 28, 2014, Nux!  wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> >> Hello,
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Wonder if someone can help me with the $subject.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> I remember at some point (4.2?) a new feature showed up accidentally
>>> in
>>> >> >> the UI instance creation dialogues, it was concerning "root size",
>>> had a
>>> >> >> small box where the number in GB would be introduced.
>>> >> >> I'd like to take advantage of that now that this feature actually
>>> works,
>>> >> >> even if only in KVM. I'd love it if someone could point me to that
>>> >> piece of
>>> >> >> code (prolly just javascript).
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> In addition to that, now that root resize works, can any one suggest
>>> >> how I
>>> >> >> might put a "resize" button in the Volumes section for the ROOT
>>> disks?
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Lucian
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> --
>>> >> >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Nux!
>>> >> >> www.nux.ro
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > *Mike Tutkowski*
>>> >> > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>>> >> > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>>> >> > o: 303.746.7302
>>> >> > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
>>> >> > *™*
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > *Mike Tutkowski*
>>> > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>>> > e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>>> > o: 303.746.7302
>>> > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
>>> > *™*
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Re: Review Request 28535: core project can not pass junit test on mac platform .

[Rohit Yadav]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/#review63285
---



core/src/com/cloud/agent/api/routing/SetFirewallRulesCommand.java


If you want insertion ordered iteration or array (toArrary output) why not 
use LinkedHashSet? Even if TreeSet will return sorted/ordered traversal or 
array, it will add log(n) complexity to already O(n) loop. Should we use that 
and fix any tests accordingly? Can you also share the test and log which broke 
for you?


- Rohit Yadav


On Nov. 29, 2014, 9:22 a.m., tian chunfeng wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/
> ---
> 
> (Updated Nov. 29, 2014, 9:22 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack.
> 
> 
> Repository: cloudstack-git
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> run test on core failed : Change firewall rule set from HashSet to TreeSet 
> because HashSet elements are not ordered , which will cause test failed when  
> elements toArray are not same between windows and mac . 
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   core/src/com/cloud/agent/api/routing/SetFirewallRulesCommand.java be85887 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> after ensure the firewall rule set in TreeSet , toArray will the same order 
> accross windows and mac platform, and passed test.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> tian chunfeng
> 
>

Re: [ACS44]release 4.4.2 release candidate RC20141121T0341 (#2)

[Daan Hoogland]

no, no new systemvm needed

On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Pierre-Luc Dion  wrote:
> For the RN, does 4.4.2 require to have a new systemvm ? otherwise the
> upgrade path from 4.4.1 to 4.4.2 will not include system vm upgrade steps.
>  make sense?
>
> I've tested 4.4.2. using 4.4.1 system vm and so far I don't see any issues.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Daan Hoogland 
> wrote:
>
>> great Wilder, sound like we're all green :-)
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Wilder Rodrigues
>>  wrote:
>> > Hi guys,
>> >
>> > Tests results for ACS 4.4.2.
>> >
>> > I will also do the same tests, but using a dump from our betacloud
>> database.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Wilder
>> >
>> > Environment:
>> >
>> > * XenServer host running on Betacloud (ACS 4.3.0 VMWare zone)
>> > * Management server running on MacBook Pro
>> > * MySQL Database running on MacBook Pro
>> > * System VM:
>> jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/4.4/job/cloudstack-4.4-systemvm64/<
>> http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/4.4/job/cloudstack-4.4-systemvm64/>
>> >
>> > Test Accounts
>> >
>> > Test Create Account and user for that account ... === TestName:
>> test_01_create_account | Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test Sub domain allowed to launch VM  when a Domain level zone is
>> created ... === TestName: test_01_add_vm_to_subdomain | Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test delete domain without force option ... === TestName:
>> test_DeleteDomain | Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test delete domain with force option ... === TestName:
>> test_forceDeleteDomain | Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test update admin details ... === TestName: test_updateAdminDetails |
>> Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test update domain admin details ... === TestName:
>> test_updateDomainAdminDetails | Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test user update API ... === TestName: test_updateUserDetails | Status :
>> SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test login API with domain ... === TestName: test_LoginApiDomain |
>> Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test if Login API does not return UUID's ... === TestName:
>> test_LoginApiUuidResponse | Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> >
>> > --
>> > Ran 9 tests in 780.740s
>> >
>> > OK
>> >
>> > Test VM Life Cycle
>> >
>> > Test advanced zone virtual router ... === TestName:
>> test_advZoneVirtualRouter | Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test Deploy Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_deploy_vm | Status :
>> SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test Multiple Deploy Virtual Machine ... === TestName:
>> test_deploy_vm_multiple | Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test Stop Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_01_stop_vm | Status :
>> SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test Start Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_02_start_vm | Status :
>> SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test Reboot Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_03_reboot_vm | Status
>> : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test destroy Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_06_destroy_vm |
>> Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test recover Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_07_restore_vm |
>> Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test migrate VM ... SKIP: At least two hosts should be present in the
>> zone for migration
>> > Test destroy(expunge) Virtual Machine ... === TestName:
>> test_09_expunge_vm | Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> >
>> > --
>> > Ran 10 tests in 741.803s
>> >
>> > OK (SKIP=1)
>> >
>> > Test Create Service Offerings [VMS are also created]
>> >
>> > Test to create service offering ... === TestName:
>> test_01_create_service_offering | Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test to update existing service offering ... === TestName:
>> test_02_edit_service_offering | Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test to delete service offering ... === TestName:
>> test_03_delete_service_offering | Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> >
>> > --
>> > Ran 3 tests in 136.911s
>> >
>> > OK
>> >
>> > Test Private GW ACLs
>> >
>> > test_privategw_acl
>> (ekholabs.acs.tests.test_privategw_acl.TestPrivateGwACL) ... === TestName:
>> test_privategw_acl | Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> >
>> > --
>> > Ran 1 test in 81.119s
>> >
>> > OK
>> >
>> > Test Routers
>> >
>> > Test router internal advanced zone ... SKIP: Marvin configuration has no
>> host credentials to check router services
>> > Test restart network ... === TestName: test_03_restart_network_cleanup |
>> Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test router basic setup ... === TestName: test_05_router_basic | Status
>> : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test router advanced setup ... === TestName: test_06_router_advanced |
>> Status : SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test stop router ... === TestName: test_07_stop_router | Status :
>> SUCCESS ===
>> > ok
>> > Test start router ... === TestName: test_08_start_rout

Re: [ACS44]release 4.4.2 release candidate RC20141121T0341 (#2)

[Pierre-Luc Dion]

Good thanks, the release note is ready for 4.4.2.


*Pierre-Luc DION*
Architecte de Solution Cloud | Cloud Solutions Architect
t 855.652.5683

*CloudOps* Votre partenaire infonuagique* | *Cloud Solutions Experts
420 rue Guy *|* Montreal *|* Quebec *|* H3J 1S6
w cloudops.com *|* tw @CloudOps_


On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 10:39 AM, Daan Hoogland 
wrote:

> no, no new systemvm needed
>
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 3:54 PM, Pierre-Luc Dion 
> wrote:
> > For the RN, does 4.4.2 require to have a new systemvm ? otherwise the
> > upgrade path from 4.4.1 to 4.4.2 will not include system vm upgrade
> steps.
> >  make sense?
> >
> > I've tested 4.4.2. using 4.4.1 system vm and so far I don't see any
> issues.
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Daan Hoogland  >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> great Wilder, sound like we're all green :-)
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 3:34 PM, Wilder Rodrigues
> >>  wrote:
> >> > Hi guys,
> >> >
> >> > Tests results for ACS 4.4.2.
> >> >
> >> > I will also do the same tests, but using a dump from our betacloud
> >> database.
> >> >
> >> > Cheers,
> >> > Wilder
> >> >
> >> > Environment:
> >> >
> >> > * XenServer host running on Betacloud (ACS 4.3.0 VMWare zone)
> >> > * Management server running on MacBook Pro
> >> > * MySQL Database running on MacBook Pro
> >> > * System VM:
> >> jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/4.4/job/cloudstack-4.4-systemvm64/<
> >> http://jenkins.buildacloud.org/view/4.4/job/cloudstack-4.4-systemvm64/>
> >> >
> >> > Test Accounts
> >> >
> >> > Test Create Account and user for that account ... === TestName:
> >> test_01_create_account | Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test Sub domain allowed to launch VM  when a Domain level zone is
> >> created ... === TestName: test_01_add_vm_to_subdomain | Status :
> SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test delete domain without force option ... === TestName:
> >> test_DeleteDomain | Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test delete domain with force option ... === TestName:
> >> test_forceDeleteDomain | Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test update admin details ... === TestName: test_updateAdminDetails |
> >> Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test update domain admin details ... === TestName:
> >> test_updateDomainAdminDetails | Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test user update API ... === TestName: test_updateUserDetails |
> Status :
> >> SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test login API with domain ... === TestName: test_LoginApiDomain |
> >> Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test if Login API does not return UUID's ... === TestName:
> >> test_LoginApiUuidResponse | Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Ran 9 tests in 780.740s
> >> >
> >> > OK
> >> >
> >> > Test VM Life Cycle
> >> >
> >> > Test advanced zone virtual router ... === TestName:
> >> test_advZoneVirtualRouter | Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test Deploy Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_deploy_vm | Status
> :
> >> SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test Multiple Deploy Virtual Machine ... === TestName:
> >> test_deploy_vm_multiple | Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test Stop Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_01_stop_vm | Status :
> >> SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test Start Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_02_start_vm |
> Status :
> >> SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test Reboot Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_03_reboot_vm |
> Status
> >> : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test destroy Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_06_destroy_vm |
> >> Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test recover Virtual Machine ... === TestName: test_07_restore_vm |
> >> Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test migrate VM ... SKIP: At least two hosts should be present in the
> >> zone for migration
> >> > Test destroy(expunge) Virtual Machine ... === TestName:
> >> test_09_expunge_vm | Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Ran 10 tests in 741.803s
> >> >
> >> > OK (SKIP=1)
> >> >
> >> > Test Create Service Offerings [VMS are also created]
> >> >
> >> > Test to create service offering ... === TestName:
> >> test_01_create_service_offering | Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test to update existing service offering ... === TestName:
> >> test_02_edit_service_offering | Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> > Test to delete service offering ... === TestName:
> >> test_03_delete_service_offering | Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Ran 3 tests in 136.911s
> >> >
> >> > OK
> >> >
> >> > Test Private GW ACLs
> >> >
> >> > test_privategw_acl
> >> (ekholabs.acs.tests.test_privategw_acl.TestPrivateGwACL) ... ===
> TestName:
> >> test_privategw_acl | Status : SUCCESS ===
> >> > ok
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Ran 1 test

Re: root resize support in the UI

[Mike Tutkowski]

I believe we require GUI changes to leverage what already works in the API
(I think this is KVM only at the time being, too).

On Saturday, November 29, 2014, Vadim Kimlaychuk 
wrote:

> Nux,
>
>  Can you give more information about this functionality? I am
> particularly interesting to show to the user this field, but don't know how
> it will work. Particularly is interesting:
> 1. Does it work for all hypervisors or just KVM?
> 2. Does it depend on the template root partition (i.e. I have 10G root at
> template and put 5G to desired. Will it work?)
> 3. This is just UI patch, shouldn't it be activated at the backend as well
> ?
>
> Thanks,
> Vadim
> 
> From: Nux! [n...@li.nux.ro ]
> Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2014 12:37
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
> Cc: Brian Federle
> Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
>
> BTW, the code needed to enable custom root size during instance creation
> is very small, functionality is already there.
> This patch is needed
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=commit;h=8fec09ba481fbd3b8c2a9e4d31ef06f113b037cb
> , I tested it and it works fine.
>
> And this is the result: https://i.imgur.com/xrs0mu4.png
>
> --
> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>
> Nux!
> www.nux.ro
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Nux!" >
> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
> > Cc: "Brian Federle" >
> > Sent: Saturday, 29 November, 2014 00:57:37
> > Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
>
> > Yes, you have a point.
> >
> > Opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-7992
> >
> > --
> > Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >
> > Nux!
> > www.nux.ro
> >
> > - Original Message -
> >> From: "Mike Tutkowski" >
> >> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
> >> Cc: "Brian Federle" >
> >> Sent: Saturday, 29 November, 2014 00:48:03
> >> Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
> >
> >> Well...I don't know...we kind of have features all over the place that
> work
> >> for one hypervisor and not for another.
> >>
> >> If we're cool with that approach, this would be just one more area
> where we
> >> have this kind of hypervisor-specific behavior (perhaps all hypervisors
> >> support such an action in the future).
> >>
> >> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Nux! >
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Was thinking to just patch my local installation. Devs might not go too
> >>> crazy over this idea since root resize is not supported across all
> >>> hypervisors (KVM only atm).
> >>>
> >>> But if you think this has a chance to go official, I will open an
> issue.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Lucian
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >>>
> >>> Nux!
> >>> www.nux.ro
> >>>
> >>> - Original Message -
> >>> > From: "Mike Tutkowski" >
> >>> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org , "Brian Federle" <
> brian.fede...@citrix.com 
> >>> >
> >>> > Sent: Saturday, 29 November, 2014 00:27:14
> >>> > Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
> >>>
> >>> > Have you logged a JIRA ticket for this?
> >>> >
> >>> > Maybe Brian or one of the GUI people could pick up on it.
> >>> >
> >>> > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Nux! >
> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Yeah, I was thinking of that, if it works for DATA, it should work
> for
> >>> >> ROOT. But I am not a dev.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Thoughts?
> >>> >>
> >>> >> --
> >>> >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Nux!
> >>> >> www.nux.ro
> >>> >>
> >>> >> - Original Message -
> >>> >> > From: "Mike Tutkowski"  >
> >>> >> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org 
> >>> >> > Sent: Friday, 28 November, 2014 19:57:27
> >>> >> > Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
> >>> >>
> >>> >> > For root disks, is it possible to just follow the existing resize
> >>> pattern
> >>> >> > we have established in the UI for data disks?
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > On Friday, November 28, 2014, Nux! >
> wrote:
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >> Hello,
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> Wonder if someone can help me with the $subject.
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> I remember at some point (4.2?) a new feature showed up
> accidentally
> >>> in
> >>> >> >> the UI instance creation dialogues, it was concerning "root
> size",
> >>> had a
> >>> >> >> small box where the number in GB would be introduced.
> >>> >> >> I'd like to take advantage of that now that this feature actually
> >>> works,
> >>> >> >> even if only in KVM. I'd love it if someone could point me to
> that
> >>> >> piece of
> >>> >> >> code (prolly just javascript).
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> In addition to that, now that root resize works, can any one
> suggest
> >>> >> how I
> >>> >> >> might put a "resize" button in the Volumes section for the ROOT
> >>> disks?
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> Lucian
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> --
> >>> >> >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >> Nux!
> >>> >> >> www.nux.ro
> >>> >> >>
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > --
> >>> >> > *Mike Tut

Re: Review Request 28535: core project can not pass junit test on mac platform .

[tian chunfeng]

> On Nov. 29, 2014, 11:32 p.m., Rohit Yadav wrote:
> > core/src/com/cloud/agent/api/routing/SetFirewallRulesCommand.java, line 50
> > 
> >
> > If you want insertion ordered iteration or array (toArrary output) why 
> > not use LinkedHashSet? Even if TreeSet will return sorted/ordered traversal 
> > or array, it will add log(n) complexity to already O(n) loop. Should we use 
> > that and fix any tests accordingly? Can you also share the test and log 
> > which broke for you?

Rohit Yadav:

Actually , LinkedHashSet is my first choice too , but can not pass the junit 
test . 
In method "generateFwRules()" , the toAdd Set only used generate toArray result 
which is expected sequenced as input in test code. 


I can pass test on windows with HashSet but failed on Mac OSX.


failed test log  (HashSet):
-

Results :

Failed tests:   
testFirewallRulesCommand(com.cloud.agent.resource.virtualnetwork.VirtualRoutingResourceTest):
 
expected:<...1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:[reverted:0:0:0:,64.10.10.10:TCP:22:80:10.10.1.1/24-10.10.1.2/24]:,>
 but 
was:<...1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:[TCP:22:80:10.10.1.1/24-10.10.1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:reverted:0:0:0]:,>
  
testAggregationCommands(com.cloud.agent.resource.virtualnetwork.VirtualRoutingResourceTest):
 
expected:<...1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:[reverted:0:0:0:,64.10.10.10:TCP:22:80:10.10.1.1/24-10.10.1.2/24]:,(..)

Tests run: 139, Failures: 2, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0

end



- tian


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/#review63285
---


On Nov. 29, 2014, 5:22 p.m., tian chunfeng wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/
> ---
> 
> (Updated Nov. 29, 2014, 5:22 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack.
> 
> 
> Repository: cloudstack-git
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> run test on core failed : Change firewall rule set from HashSet to TreeSet 
> because HashSet elements are not ordered , which will cause test failed when  
> elements toArray are not same between windows and mac . 
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   core/src/com/cloud/agent/api/routing/SetFirewallRulesCommand.java be85887 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> after ensure the firewall rule set in TreeSet , toArray will the same order 
> accross windows and mac platform, and passed test.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> tian chunfeng
> 
>

Re: Review Request 28535: core project can not pass junit test on mac platform .

[Rohit Yadav]

> On Nov. 29, 2014, 3:32 p.m., Rohit Yadav wrote:
> > core/src/com/cloud/agent/api/routing/SetFirewallRulesCommand.java, line 50
> > 
> >
> > If you want insertion ordered iteration or array (toArrary output) why 
> > not use LinkedHashSet? Even if TreeSet will return sorted/ordered traversal 
> > or array, it will add log(n) complexity to already O(n) loop. Should we use 
> > that and fix any tests accordingly? Can you also share the test and log 
> > which broke for you?
> 
> ChunFeng Tian wrote:
> Rohit Yadav:
> 
> Actually , LinkedHashSet is my first choice too , but can not pass the 
> junit test . 
> In method "generateFwRules()" , the toAdd Set only used generate toArray 
> result which is expected sequenced as input in test code. 
> 
> 
> I can pass test on windows with HashSet but failed on Mac OSX.
> 
> 
> failed test log  (HashSet):
> -
> 
> Results :
> 
> Failed tests:   
> testFirewallRulesCommand(com.cloud.agent.resource.virtualnetwork.VirtualRoutingResourceTest):
>  
> expected:<...1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:[reverted:0:0:0:,64.10.10.10:TCP:22:80:10.10.1.1/24-10.10.1.2/24]:,>
>  but 
> was:<...1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:[TCP:22:80:10.10.1.1/24-10.10.1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:reverted:0:0:0]:,>
>   
> testAggregationCommands(com.cloud.agent.resource.virtualnetwork.VirtualRoutingResourceTest):
>  
> expected:<...1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:[reverted:0:0:0:,64.10.10.10:TCP:22:80:10.10.1.1/24-10.10.1.2/24]:,(..)
> 
> Tests run: 139, Failures: 2, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0
> 
> end
> 

Hi, I played the patch using LinkedHashSet, it builds fine and the tests passes 
for me on OSX using JDK 1.7. In fact the tests have been passing for most of us 
in OSX, since this test has been in core module for several months.

Are you using JDK 7? If you're using JDK 8, some tests and build failures may 
happen.


- Rohit


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/#review63285
---


On Nov. 29, 2014, 9:22 a.m., ChunFeng Tian wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/
> ---
> 
> (Updated Nov. 29, 2014, 9:22 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack.
> 
> 
> Repository: cloudstack-git
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> run test on core failed : Change firewall rule set from HashSet to TreeSet 
> because HashSet elements are not ordered , which will cause test failed when  
> elements toArray are not same between windows and mac . 
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   core/src/com/cloud/agent/api/routing/SetFirewallRulesCommand.java be85887 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> after ensure the firewall rule set in TreeSet , toArray will the same order 
> accross windows and mac platform, and passed test.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> ChunFeng Tian
> 
>

Re: Review Request 28535: core project can not pass junit test on mac platform .

[ChunFeng Tian]

> On Nov. 29, 2014, 11:32 p.m., Rohit Yadav wrote:
> > core/src/com/cloud/agent/api/routing/SetFirewallRulesCommand.java, line 50
> > 
> >
> > If you want insertion ordered iteration or array (toArrary output) why 
> > not use LinkedHashSet? Even if TreeSet will return sorted/ordered traversal 
> > or array, it will add log(n) complexity to already O(n) loop. Should we use 
> > that and fix any tests accordingly? Can you also share the test and log 
> > which broke for you?
> 
> ChunFeng Tian wrote:
> Rohit Yadav:
> 
> Actually , LinkedHashSet is my first choice too , but can not pass the 
> junit test . 
> In method "generateFwRules()" , the toAdd Set only used generate toArray 
> result which is expected sequenced as input in test code. 
> 
> 
> I can pass test on windows with HashSet but failed on Mac OSX.
> 
> 
> failed test log  (HashSet):
> -
> 
> Results :
> 
> Failed tests:   
> testFirewallRulesCommand(com.cloud.agent.resource.virtualnetwork.VirtualRoutingResourceTest):
>  
> expected:<...1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:[reverted:0:0:0:,64.10.10.10:TCP:22:80:10.10.1.1/24-10.10.1.2/24]:,>
>  but 
> was:<...1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:[TCP:22:80:10.10.1.1/24-10.10.1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:reverted:0:0:0]:,>
>   
> testAggregationCommands(com.cloud.agent.resource.virtualnetwork.VirtualRoutingResourceTest):
>  
> expected:<...1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:[reverted:0:0:0:,64.10.10.10:TCP:22:80:10.10.1.1/24-10.10.1.2/24]:,(..)
> 
> Tests run: 139, Failures: 2, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0
> 
> end
> 
> 
> Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Hi, I played the patch using LinkedHashSet, it builds fine and the tests 
> passes for me on OSX using JDK 1.7. In fact the tests have been passing for 
> most of us in OSX, since this test has been in core module for several months.
> 
> Are you using JDK 7? If you're using JDK 8, some tests and build failures 
> may happen.

Rohit Yadav,

You get me out , I check my default osx java version is : java version 
"1.8.0_05" .

When I view the pom.xml under the dir of  cloudstack , it required java 1.7 

1.7

but , it seemed that the above line can not work .


I will close this review request ,

Thanks again .

ChunFeng


- ChunFeng


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/#review63285
---


On Nov. 29, 2014, 5:22 p.m., ChunFeng Tian wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/
> ---
> 
> (Updated Nov. 29, 2014, 5:22 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack.
> 
> 
> Repository: cloudstack-git
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> run test on core failed : Change firewall rule set from HashSet to TreeSet 
> because HashSet elements are not ordered , which will cause test failed when  
> elements toArray are not same between windows and mac . 
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   core/src/com/cloud/agent/api/routing/SetFirewallRulesCommand.java be85887 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> after ensure the firewall rule set in TreeSet , toArray will the same order 
> accross windows and mac platform, and passed test.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> ChunFeng Tian
> 
>

Jenkins build is back to stable : simulator-singlerun #715

[jenkins]

See 

Re: Review Request 28535: core project can not pass junit test on mac platform .

[Rohit Yadav]

> On Nov. 29, 2014, 3:32 p.m., Rohit Yadav wrote:
> > core/src/com/cloud/agent/api/routing/SetFirewallRulesCommand.java, line 50
> > 
> >
> > If you want insertion ordered iteration or array (toArrary output) why 
> > not use LinkedHashSet? Even if TreeSet will return sorted/ordered traversal 
> > or array, it will add log(n) complexity to already O(n) loop. Should we use 
> > that and fix any tests accordingly? Can you also share the test and log 
> > which broke for you?
> 
> ChunFeng Tian wrote:
> Rohit Yadav:
> 
> Actually , LinkedHashSet is my first choice too , but can not pass the 
> junit test . 
> In method "generateFwRules()" , the toAdd Set only used generate toArray 
> result which is expected sequenced as input in test code. 
> 
> 
> I can pass test on windows with HashSet but failed on Mac OSX.
> 
> 
> failed test log  (HashSet):
> -
> 
> Results :
> 
> Failed tests:   
> testFirewallRulesCommand(com.cloud.agent.resource.virtualnetwork.VirtualRoutingResourceTest):
>  
> expected:<...1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:[reverted:0:0:0:,64.10.10.10:TCP:22:80:10.10.1.1/24-10.10.1.2/24]:,>
>  but 
> was:<...1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:[TCP:22:80:10.10.1.1/24-10.10.1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:reverted:0:0:0]:,>
>   
> testAggregationCommands(com.cloud.agent.resource.virtualnetwork.VirtualRoutingResourceTest):
>  
> expected:<...1.2/24:,64.10.10.10:[reverted:0:0:0:,64.10.10.10:TCP:22:80:10.10.1.1/24-10.10.1.2/24]:,(..)
> 
> Tests run: 139, Failures: 2, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0
> 
> end
> 
> 
> Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Hi, I played the patch using LinkedHashSet, it builds fine and the tests 
> passes for me on OSX using JDK 1.7. In fact the tests have been passing for 
> most of us in OSX, since this test has been in core module for several months.
> 
> Are you using JDK 7? If you're using JDK 8, some tests and build failures 
> may happen.
> 
> ChunFeng Tian wrote:
> Rohit Yadav,
> 
> You get me out , I check my default osx java version is : java version 
> "1.8.0_05" .
> 
> When I view the pom.xml under the dir of  cloudstack , it required java 
> 1.7 
> 
> 1.7
> 
> but , it seemed that the above line can not work .
> 
> 
> I will close this review request ,
> 
> Thanks again .
> 
> ChunFeng

Glad I can help, just install and use JDK 1.7 for now.
Feel free to send us more patches and consider to send us Github Pull requests 
on https://github.com/apache/cloudstack. Thanks.


- Rohit


---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/#review63285
---


On Nov. 29, 2014, 9:22 a.m., ChunFeng Tian wrote:
> 
> ---
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/
> ---
> 
> (Updated Nov. 29, 2014, 9:22 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack.
> 
> 
> Repository: cloudstack-git
> 
> 
> Description
> ---
> 
> run test on core failed : Change firewall rule set from HashSet to TreeSet 
> because HashSet elements are not ordered , which will cause test failed when  
> elements toArray are not same between windows and mac . 
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -
> 
>   core/src/com/cloud/agent/api/routing/SetFirewallRulesCommand.java be85887 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/28535/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> ---
> 
> after ensure the firewall rule set in TreeSet , toArray will the same order 
> accross windows and mac platform, and passed test.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> ChunFeng Tian
> 
>

Re: root resize support in the UI

[Nux!]

Vadim,

1. Only KVM for now, due to lack of interest I guess
2. The root disk value needs to be equal or larger than that of the template, 
otherwise you end up with a broken disk, obviously. So go for minimal (say 
under 10G) templates that can resize themselves, such as the ones at 
http://dl.openvm.eu ;)
3. The backend API has been supporting this since 4.4.0, it's the UI that is 
lagging behind
More details here https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-6181

Lucian

--
Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

Nux!
www.nux.ro

- Original Message -
> From: "Vadim Kimlaychuk" 
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Sent: Saturday, 29 November, 2014 15:17:16
> Subject: RE: root resize support in the UI

> Nux,
> 
> Can you give more information about this functionality? I am 
> particularly
> interesting to show to the user this field, but don't know how it 
> will work.
> Particularly is interesting:
> 1. Does it work for all hypervisors or just KVM?
> 2. Does it depend on the template root partition (i.e. I have 10G root at
> template and put 5G to desired. Will it work?)
> 3. This is just UI patch, shouldn't it be activated at the backend as well ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Vadim
> 
> From: Nux! [n...@li.nux.ro]
> Sent: Saturday, November 29, 2014 12:37
> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
> Cc: Brian Federle
> Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
> 
> BTW, the code needed to enable custom root size during instance creation is 
> very
> small, functionality is already there.
> This patch is needed
> https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a=commit;h=8fec09ba481fbd3b8c2a9e4d31ef06f113b037cb
> , I tested it and it works fine.
> 
> And this is the result: https://i.imgur.com/xrs0mu4.png
> 
> --
> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
> 
> Nux!
> www.nux.ro
> 
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Nux!" 
>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>> Cc: "Brian Federle" 
>> Sent: Saturday, 29 November, 2014 00:57:37
>> Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
> 
>> Yes, you have a point.
>>
>> Opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-7992
>>
>> --
>> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
>>
>> Nux!
>> www.nux.ro
>>
>> - Original Message -
>>> From: "Mike Tutkowski" 
>>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
>>> Cc: "Brian Federle" 
>>> Sent: Saturday, 29 November, 2014 00:48:03
>>> Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
>>
>>> Well...I don't know...we kind of have features all over the place that work
>>> for one hypervisor and not for another.
>>>
>>> If we're cool with that approach, this would be just one more area where we
>>> have this kind of hypervisor-specific behavior (perhaps all hypervisors
>>> support such an action in the future).
>>>
>>> On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Nux!  wrote:
>>>
 Was thinking to just patch my local installation. Devs might not go too
 crazy over this idea since root resize is not supported across all
 hypervisors (KVM only atm).

 But if you think this has a chance to go official, I will open an issue.

 Thanks,
 Lucian

 --
 Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!

 Nux!
 www.nux.ro

 - Original Message -
 > From: "Mike Tutkowski" 
 > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org, "Brian Federle" >>> >
 > Sent: Saturday, 29 November, 2014 00:27:14
 > Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI

 > Have you logged a JIRA ticket for this?
 >
 > Maybe Brian or one of the GUI people could pick up on it.
 >
 > On Fri, Nov 28, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Nux!  wrote:
 >
 >> Yeah, I was thinking of that, if it works for DATA, it should work for
 >> ROOT. But I am not a dev.
 >>
 >> Thoughts?
 >>
 >> --
 >> Sent from the Delta quadrant using Borg technology!
 >>
 >> Nux!
 >> www.nux.ro
 >>
 >> - Original Message -
 >> > From: "Mike Tutkowski" 
 >> > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
 >> > Sent: Friday, 28 November, 2014 19:57:27
 >> > Subject: Re: root resize support in the UI
 >>
 >> > For root disks, is it possible to just follow the existing resize
 pattern
 >> > we have established in the UI for data disks?
 >> >
 >> > On Friday, November 28, 2014, Nux!  wrote:
 >> >
 >> >> Hello,
 >> >>
 >> >> Wonder if someone can help me with the $subject.
 >> >>
 >> >> I remember at some point (4.2?) a new feature showed up accidentally
 in
 >> >> the UI instance creation dialogues, it was concerning "root size",
 had a
 >> >> small box where the number in GB would be introduced.
 >> >> I'd like to take advantage of that now that this feature actually
 works,
 >> >> even if only in KVM. I'd love it if someone could point me to that
 >> piece of
 >> >> code (prolly just javascript).
 >> >>
 >> >> I

Re: Review Request 24991: CLOUDSTACK-6697: BigSwitchVns plugin update

[Kuang-Ching Wang]

---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/24991/
---

(Updated Nov. 30, 2014, 2:49 a.m.)


Review request for cloudstack, Chiradeep Vittal, David Nalley, Sebastien 
Goasguen, and Hugo Trippaers.


Changes
---

address review comment: clearing create-schema.sql; move schema change to 
schema450to460.sql; update pom.xml dependency from 4.5 to 4.6


Repository: cloudstack-git


Description
---

CLOUDSTACK-6697: Big Switch network plugin update
1. provide compatibility with the Big Cloud Fabric (BCF) controller
   L2 Connectivity Service in both VPC and non-VPC modes
2. virtual network terminology updates: VNS --> BCF_SEGMENT
3. uses HTTPS with trust-always certificate handling
4. topology sync support with BCF controller
5. support multiple (two) BCF controllers with HA
6. support VM migration


Diffs (updated)
-

  .travis.yml cb07a68cb3e7decf7cdb593172d8c9011c418e36 
  api/src/com/cloud/network/Network.java 
c5a9bf286df8d502a6ca33661fb52ee717643566 
  api/src/com/cloud/network/PhysicalNetwork.java 
7c9349d932771fdbecc4a0b1ae4cad28b3d67857 
  api/src/org/apache/cloudstack/api/response/UserVmResponse.java 
9fe3475f57afebbd976294e4fd5231cdf77612c2 
  client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages.properties 
3228578ce81a826f49166a72a6c67143fb12c95d 
  client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages_fr_FR.properties 
54dc6215a8339b9f8c2bad9fe4c3ed18b4a702e7 
  client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages_ja_JP.properties 
1962e92a4cf47978dae35a3d2b090b4c1765fecb 
  client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages_ko_KR.properties 
ced576cb23598e7d3e5005bc24c2adf20b66a826 
  client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages_nl_NL.properties 
86653a5f5144c75e67b5a6f02c47d37bd5a71ef0 
  client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages_pt_BR.properties 
fa77633a650f1b37d8398a8936bbf84f5b4a40e3 
  client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages_ru_RU.properties 
7f57daa58bef379ddb47acb88965d0defe32ad73 
  client/WEB-INF/classes/resources/messages_zh_CN.properties 
217849582b41cb2c63a0e305e5613af6f659d11d 
  client/pom.xml 6803f9a11fd2c80523ea16bdd35f2a4d163f953c 
  client/tomcatconf/commands.properties.in 
a87d1677f24657299ec24d4ce9df9a180a62bd0c 
  engine/schema/src/com/cloud/upgrade/dao/Upgrade442to450.java 
dc1057f9033fd783900e6c3b623d3b28fb7d6836 
  engine/schema/src/com/cloud/user/dao/VmDiskStatisticsDaoImpl.java 
e1136d3cf567b73fd1198181aea4d6995df6b78a 
  
engine/storage/datamotion/src/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/motion/AncientDataMotionStrategy.java
 5b01f95eef164e725001f34528e46dde0eb15f99 
  packaging/centos63/cloud.spec 072a0b94884c5f32176df3ac0083249a52a1f9ed 
  packaging/centos63/default/macros.spec 
f3c937cac37afb39c1d95d223a0debd42c19a505 
  packaging/centos63/default/tomcat.sh 0908da4696e300d0b26a1aef18ce08b1816e9af9 
  packaging/centos63/package.sh 00c19478ea0125fbf1ec5902cc7da11d7bbdc5de 
  packaging/centos63/rhel7/cloud-management.service 
5d69885640416bbf1760eb644a062a1f79b5022a 
  packaging/centos63/rhel7/macros.spec 4b7109280abcb22b3f846edd81147391477289e9 
  packaging/centos63/rhel7/tomcat.sh 03c6e7b97848a923bf69b57abd2970aeb883c4c7 
  packaging/centos63/tomcat.sh PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/cloud-agent.rc PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/cloud-ipallocator.rc PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/cloud-management.service PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/cloud-management.sudoers PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/cloud-management.sysconfig PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/cloud-usage-sysd PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/cloud-usage.service PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/cloud-usage.sysconfig PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/cloud.limits PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/cloud.spec PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/cloudstack-agent.te PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/cloudstack-sccs PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/replace.properties PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/tomcat7/catalina.properties PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/tomcat7/cloud-bridge.properties PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/tomcat7/commons-logging.properties PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/tomcat7/db.properties PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/tomcat7/ec2-service.properties PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/tomcat7/environment.properties PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/tomcat7/log4j-cloud.xml PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/tomcat7/server.xml PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/tomcat7/tomcat-users.xml PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/centos7/tomcat7/web.xml PRE-CREATION 
  packaging/package.sh PRE-CREATION 
  
plugins/hypervisors/kvm/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/kvm/resource/LibvirtComputingResource.java
 d22487afff1ad8e681aff5303ad0f96af316d8e6 
  plugins/network-elements/bigswitch-vns/pom.xml 
afb267cdb5bc52aea23bc6739ea21d8f52e94ede 
  
plugins/network-elements/bigswitch-vns/resources/META-INF/cloudstack/vns/module.properties
 5783d38e5cb78be0d418c80981246d721d18b62a 
  
plugins/netw