On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 2:43 AM, David Nalley wrote:
> we could always add it to .gitignore
> That wouldn't stop changes from being made, but it would stop changes
> from propagating to the repo itself.
>
But David, one can git add -f or something. Can we put a git hook (post
commit/push) on the
I am trying out the upgrade instructions from
http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/projects/cloudstack-release-notes/en/4.3/rnotes.html#upgrade-from-4-1-x-to-4-3
but going to 4.4 built from source today.
My setup: XenServer 6.0.2 Hosts, Management Server on Ubuntu 12.04, Primary and
Secondary on N
GitHub user creategui opened a pull request:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack-docs-install/pull/17
fix apt repository setup
You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:
$ git pull https://github.com/creategui/cloudstack-docs-install patch-2
Alternativ
Hi Daan,
Please cherry-pick following commit for fixing CLOUDSTACK-3540:
commit 46f2b61374c2012bca251c1de58fb1250e50b755
Author: Sheng Yang
Date: Fri Jun 27 17:16:56 2014 -0700
CLOUDSTACK-3540: Fix edithosts.sh on matching tag
Thank you!
--Sheng
Hi,
If you click on the Storage tab in the GUI when you have one or more
volumes, you receive the following exception (is this something someone is
already working on?):
Caused by: com.mysql.jdbc.exceptions.jdbc4.MySQLSyntaxErrorException:
Unknown column 'volume_view.template_name' in 'field list
Can I change the existing network offering traffic shaping policy?
Either API or DB?
On 6/26/14, 6:52 PM, Sateesh Chodapuneedi wrote:
Yes, it's tied to networking offering. Implemented network settings follows the
network offering.
Regards,
Sateesh
-Original Message-
From: Nux! [mailt
good call, we'll have to remember to temporarily remove it as we start on 5.0
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:13 PM, David Nalley wrote:
> we could always add it to .gitignore
> That wouldn't stop changes from being made, but it would stop changes
> from propagating to the repo itself.
>
> On Fri, Jun
we could always add it to .gitignore
That wouldn't stop changes from being made, but it would stop changes
from propagating to the repo itself.
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> Rohit, sorry for the late reaction. this works for defending yourself
> and maybe we should all d
Rohit, sorry for the late reaction. this works for defending yourself
and maybe we should all do it, it doesn't defend the repo from
checkins. I would prefer that.
On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 10:07 PM, Rohit Yadav wrote:
> Hi Daan and others,
>
> Let me share a way to guard files that interest us by
> On June 26, 2014, 11:46 p.m., Mike Tutkowski wrote:
> > I first had a chance to run this patch through a sophisticated test tonight
> > and noticed an issue with zone-wide primary storage that's based on the
> > iSCSI protocol.
> >
> > This patch leads to iSCSI storage being filtered out for
Hello,
As i know in CS there is a process/scheduler is running which delete the
vms from hyper-wiser( xen host) if that vms info are not available in
database.
how we can disable this service/scheduler for some time.
--
Thanks and Regards,
cpm
Alex,
Regardless of the implementation being a plugin or part of the core management
server codebase, acceptance of this patch into master shifts responsibility for
its on-going support and maintenance to the community. Until the issues
outlined in my previous email are adequately explained/un
Correct, its a typo - albeit on purpose. I kept the old numbering so
folks can upgrade to 4.3.1 - when it comes out. But it should be
CloudSand 4.3.0.2 - Release (powered by Apache CloudStack). I guess, by
re-branding it, i can get away with making no-redist packages available
to general public
[cross posting]
All
We have just launched two new things on the Cloudstack.org website.
a) A list of known users of Cloudstack
(http://cloudstack.apache.org/users.html)
b) A survey of cloudstack adoption for users of the software to complete
(http://cloudstack.apache.org/survey.htm
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/17790/
---
(Updated June 27, 2014, 5:04 p.m.)
Review request for cloudstack.
Repository:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/20099/
---
(Updated June 27, 2014, 5:02 p.m.)
Review request for cloudstack.
Repository:
Hi John,
Thanks a lot for your detailed feedback, but I strongly suggest to continue
to discuss about them after this development is wrapped up
because this feature is provided as a plugin and and will not work unless
you turn it on in case you don't want to use.
Thanks
Alex Ough
On Fri, Jun 27
OK, thanks for reverting those commits.
As I say, we have a similar commit in master (which I have modified and
Noji may have modified again). That one is OK since we're actively
developing on master and I have time to work out any issues that may remain
from it. It is mainly the 4.4 and 4.4-forwa
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/22807/#review46869
---
Commit 7959c1faf0828c0974de6d891d7685c2916122d7 in cloudstack's bran
Alex,
I appreciate you taking the time to answer my questions since I am late joining
this conversation. I wanted to make sure I understand the underlying design
and its assumptions before commenting in depth. My detailed followups are
in-line below. TL;DR I am concerned that the design does
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/22807/#review46868
---
Commit 80f2694443e2795f289c95b10776285cc449f779 in cloudstack's bran
Mike, Noji asked me to commit it http://markmail.org/message/da6irvkbfqolwz6r
You are right about it not being marked as critical and both 6928 and
6935 coming from him I assumed
sorry
@Noji, I will revert the commits.
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Mike Tutkowski
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I would
I see it now. Thanks!
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 1:17 AM, Daan Hoogland
wrote:
> No I did: the push. it is there now
>
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Mike Tutkowski
> wrote:
> > Hi Daan,
> >
> > I'm not seeing this commit in 4.4.
> >
> > Did I miss something?
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Mike
> >
> >
Hi,
I would say that once Daan reverts the commits I mentioned in a previous
e-mail (related to 4.4 and 4.4-forward) that we are OK on those branches.
We can then try out the patch on master and see how it works.
Unless I'm missing something, I don't think that code was intended for 4.4
or even
I spoke to Craig and this is working. Let me know if you still have
problems.
Angela
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 4:29 AM, sebgoa wrote:
> I am on it already
>
>
> On Jun 27, 2014, at 1:10 PM, Daan Hoogland
> wrote:
>
> > happened to me last week, probably some automated schedule is
> > different
should be good now
On Jun 27, 2014, at 1:29 PM, sebgoa wrote:
> I am on it already
>
>
> On Jun 27, 2014, at 1:10 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
>
>> happened to me last week, probably some automated schedule is
>> different then the one Sebastien is using. It got fixed by mailing the
>> linux fou
Jonn,
1. out of spec. we can add this later if necessary.
2. out of spec. we can add this later if necessary.
3. out of spec. we can add this later if necessary.
4. Whenever there are changes in the records, the time stamps are logged
and the later change wins.
5. It relies on the order of events,
Kishan,
1. Why Long instead of Integer : You replied that it should be Integer
2. @Encrypt : Does it both encrypt & decrypt? Is there anything necessary
to make it work because it doesn't seem to work when I trace the persist.
Thanks
Alex Ough
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Kishan Kavala
wro
Alex,
Are the questions on review board?
From: Alex Ough [mailto:alex.o...@sungardas.com]
Sent: Friday, 27 June 2014 12:03 AM
To: Alena Prokharchyk
Cc: Kishan Kavala; dev@cloudstack.apache.org; Murali Reddy; Ram Ganesh; Animesh
Chaturvedi
Subject: Re: Review Request 20099: Domain-Account-User Syn
On Jun 27, 2014, at 1:12 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> Ilya, I saw your mail about a 4.3.0.1. Sebastien is RM for a 4.3.1
>
> Are these different? Let's be clear about release numbering.
>
I think it's a typo from Ilya, should be talking about 4.3.1
> --
> Daan
I am on it already
On Jun 27, 2014, at 1:10 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> happened to me last week, probably some automated schedule is
> different then the one Sebastien is using. It got fixed by mailing the
> linux foundation. Angela?
>
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Nguyen Anh Tu wrote:
Ilya, I saw your mail about a 4.3.0.1. Sebastien is RM for a 4.3.1
Are these different? Let's be clear about release numbering.
--
Daan
happened to me last week, probably some automated schedule is
different then the one Sebastien is using. It got fixed by mailing the
linux foundation. Angela?
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 12:26 PM, Nguyen Anh Tu wrote:
> Seem like it's over, Sebastien. I can't choose CCCEU14 event when creating
> new
Ok, I didn't get that from the diff or the nearby code, so I probably
need to study the code more to get that from it that's why I would
like you to add a descriptive comment (or ref to the relevant code in
a comment). This way future generation will understand the snippit
more easily.
ok?
On Fri
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Sateesh Chodapuneedi
wrote:
> 75aa243d1ea64493b70e9d8466d96c4842dfdf1a
is in
--
Daan
Thanks Noji,
Please be very specific about which commits should be reverted and
which should be cherry-picked (and which related commits should stay)
I don't want to do anything last minute untill we are absolutely sure
and in agreement of what will work.
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 10:42 AM, Yoshika
Seem like it's over, Sebastien. I can't choose CCCEU14 event when creating
new submition.
--Tuna
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Sebastien Goasguen
wrote:
> Folks,
>
> It it technically the last day to submit talks for CCC Budapest Nov 19-21.
>
> http://cloudstackcollab.org
>
> -Sebastien
>
If the use is not passing "type" parameter then capacityResponse will return
all the resource capacities including GPU resource capacity.
--Sanjay
-Original Message-
From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 1:49 PM
To: Sanjay Tripathi
Cc: dev@clou
Hi Daan,
Request you to cherry pick following commit to 4.4 branch.
Branch: refs/heads/4.4-forward
Commit: 75aa243d1ea64493b70e9d8466d96c4842dfdf1a
Parents: 48646ae
This fixes bug CLOUDSTACK-6996 which is critical bug for CloudStack deployments
over VMware which involves upgrade from Cloud
Hi Dann,
Thank you for organizing issue.
> Is this a blocker?
Yes, it is. At least Mike's latest commit in master should be picked
into 4.4 to utilize SolidFire's storage.
If possible, I would like to make additional change I proposed. I
regard this part is better to have, but not a blocker for 4.
Folks,
It it technically the last day to submit talks for CCC Budapest Nov 19-21.
http://cloudstackcollab.org
-Sebastien
So, if the user is not passing the type as second parameter, we don't
need to check GPU values?
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Sanjay Tripathi
wrote:
> Hi Daan,
>
> The first part is to check if user is not passing "type" field to query only
> one resource type so that in result, we'll have m
Hi Daan,
The first part is to check if user is not passing "type" field to query only
one resource type so that in result, we'll have more than one elements; and the
second part of the check fetching the zoneId, podId and clusterId from the
existing result to get the GPU resource capacity detai
Noji, Mike,
Is this a blocker? I realize that we are in three different timezones
and always one of us must be sleeping but I really would like to
handle this today in spite of other tasks.
@Mike: I suppose you would consider it a blocker. if you read Noji's
latest proposal before breakfast, can
One question Sanjay,
The second commit changes a check of .isEmpty() to .size() >1 and then
does some checks on element 0. So what is the significance of this. It
is not intuitive what happens here. Can you explain?
I gave it the benefit of the doubt and cherry-picked both, btw.
On Fri, Jun 27,
No I did: the push. it is there now
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Mike Tutkowski
wrote:
> Hi Daan,
>
> I'm not seeing this commit in 4.4.
>
> Did I miss something?
>
> Thanks!
> Mike
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Daan Hoogland
> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 6:53 PM, Mike Tutk
ok, Mike I will have a look how it came in and revert
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 8:19 AM, Mike Tutkowski
wrote:
> Yeah, I just looked at the Review Request:
>
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/22717/#review46838
>
> It says it's for master (4.5), so I'm not sure how this ended up in 4.4 or
> 4.4-forwar
47 matches
Mail list logo
