Re: [DISCUSS] Disaster Recovery solution for CloudStack

hi, Any idea? 2013/5/31 Wido den Hollander > On 05/31/2013 11:02 AM, Nguyen Anh Tu wrote: > >> Hi forks, >> >> I'm looking for a Disaster Recovery solution on CS. Looking around I found >> an article showing some great informations but not enought. Personally I >> think: >> >> + Host: CS alrea

RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

-1 Extending the release will mean even more features will be packed into the 4.2, which already has quite a lot of changes. The delays with 4.1 shows that testing is a big job already and more features will make it worse. I'm convinced that allowing for more time in 4.2 would not improve the

Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)

I don't want to see NORMAL users getting failed with running cloudstack and sending email for asking the workaround. # Even if you're thinking we're not wrong. If you're going to release a5214bee99f6c5582d755c9499f7d99fd7b5b701 as 4.1.0, I'd like to suggest releasing 4.1.1 asap. # I know the vot

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-2648 [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Reboot or start/stop router vm deletes the ip alises created on VR in case of multiple subnets

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11437/ --- (Updated June 3, 2013, 10:01 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Pr

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-2648 [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Reboot or start/stop router vm deletes the ip alises created on VR in case of multiple subnets

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11437/#review21309 --- server/src/com/cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManagerImpl.java

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-2648 [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Reboot or start/stop router vm deletes the ip alises created on VR in case of multiple subnets

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11437/ --- (Updated June 3, 2013, 10:10 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Pr

Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)

On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 01:35:06PM -0400, Chip Childers wrote: > The vote has *passed* with the following results (binding PMC votes > indicated with a "*" next to their name: > > +1 : Edison*, Hugo*, Marcus*, David*, Wido*, Ilya, Animesh, Milamber, > Joe*, Simon, Prasanna* > -0 : John > -1 :

Re: Review Request: Cloudstack-2621 [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Failed to delete guest IP range from a new subnet/C

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11435/ --- (Updated June 3, 2013, 10:27 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Pr

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-2620 [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Guest vm's nameserver is not set to VRs guest IP address in case of multiple subnets

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11436/ --- (Updated June 3, 2013, 11:10 a.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Pr

[ACS41] Upgrade from 2.2.13

Hi, we try to upgrade from 2.2.14 to 4.1 And we failed on this logs : 2013-06-03 13:15:24,367 DEBUG [utils.db.ScriptRunner] (Timer-1:null) UPDATE `cloud`.`user` SET PASSWORD=RAND() WHERE id=1 2013-06-03 13:15:24,367 DEBUG [utils.db.ScriptRunner] (Timer-1:null) ALTER TABLE `cloud_usage`.`account

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-2620 [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Guest vm's nameserver is not set to VRs guest IP address in case of multiple subnets

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11436/ --- (Updated June 3, 2013, 12:07 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Pr

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-2648 [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Reboot or start/stop router vm deletes the ip alises created on VR in case of multiple subnets

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11437/#review21311 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Koushik Das On June 3, 2013, 10:10 a.m., bha

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-2620 [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Guest vm's nameserver is not set to VRs guest IP address in case of multiple subnets

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11436/ --- (Updated June 3, 2013, 1:08 p.m.) Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Pra

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-2620 [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Guest vm's nameserver is not set to VRs guest IP address in case of multiple subnets

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11436/#review21314 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Koushik Das On June 3, 2013, 1:08 p.m., bhar

Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)

On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 03:40:04PM +0530, Prasanna Santhanam wrote: > On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 01:35:06PM -0400, Chip Childers wrote: > > The vote has *passed* with the following results (binding PMC votes > > indicated with a "*" next to their name: > > > > +1 : Edison*, Hugo*, Marcus*, David*, Wi

Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)

On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 06:40:55PM +0900, Hiroaki KAWAI wrote: > I don't want to see NORMAL users getting failed with running > cloudstack and sending email for asking the workaround. > # Even if you're thinking we're not wrong. > > If you're going to release a5214bee99f6c5582d755c9499f7d99fd7b5b7

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-2620 [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Guest vm's nameserver is not set to VRs guest IP address in case of multiple subnets

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11436/#review21317 --- Commit 0a69b828993088487876ce859e6c00e96e4b545c in branch refs/heads

[ACS41] Upgrade from 2.2.14 failed

I create an issue : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2822 -- Nicolas Lamirault _ Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidenti

Re: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

Reminder to please VOTE here. This vote will close tomorrow, and your opinion counts. -chip On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:00:21AM -0400, Chip Childers wrote: > Following our discussion on the proposal to push back the feature freeze > date for 4.2.0 [1], we have not yet achieved a clear consensus.

Review Request: Cloudstack-2511 Multiple_Ip_Ranges: Adding guest ip range in subset/superset to existing CIDR is allowed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2511, Cloudstack-2651 [Shared

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11600/ --- Review request for cloudstack, Abhinandan Prateek and Koushik Das. Description

Re: Review Request: CLOUDSTACK-2648 [Multiple_IP_Ranges] Reboot or start/stop router vm deletes the ip alises created on VR in case of multiple subnets

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/11437/#review21318 --- Commit 48913679e80e50228b1bd4b3d17fe5245461626a in branch refs/heads

netscaler jars hosted in maven central

Hi, The Apache licensed netscaler jars are now hosted in maven central. It is possible to make the netscaler plug-in as part of the OSS. Please check the details below. Nitro jar entry *** com.citrix.netscaler.nitro nitro 10.0.e SDX Nitro jar entry * com.citrix.netscaler.ni

Re: netscaler jars hosted in maven central

Wonderful news Vijay. Glad to see this accomplished. On Jun 3, 2013 10:13 AM, "Vijay Venkatachalam" < vijay.venkatacha...@citrix.com> wrote: > Hi, > > The Apache licensed netscaler jars are now hosted in maven central. > It is possible to make the netscaler plug-in as part of the OSS. > > Please c

Re: [MERGE]object_store branch into master

Edison/Chip, Please see my comments in-line. Thanks, -John On May 31, 2013, at 4:04 PM, Chip Childers wrote: > Comments inline: > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 09:42:29PM +, Edison Su wrote: >> >> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: John Burwell [mailto:jburw...@basho.com] >>> Sent: Th

Re: [VOTE][RESULTS] Release Apache CloudStack 4.1.0 (fifth round)

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013, at 08:39 AM, Chip Childers wrote: > 2) Someone (not me, due to vacation starting Wed) needs to spin a 4.1.1 > release > ASAP to include the fix for this. I'm happy to help get this together if Ilya needs any assistance. I'm flying today but will be around tomorrow and Wednesda

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

Wei, On Jun 3, 2013, at 2:13 AM, Wei ZHOU wrote: > Hi John, Mike > > I hope Mike's aswer helps you. I am trying to adding more. > > (1) I think billing should depend on IO statistics rather than IOPS > limitation. Please review disk_io_stat if you have time. disk_io_stat can > get the IO st

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

John, For the billing, as no one works on billing now, users need to calculate the billing by themselves. They can get the service_offering and disk_offering of a VMs and volumes for calculation. Of course it is better to tell user the exact limitation value of individual volume, and network rate

StaticNatRule vs StaticNat

What is the difference between these interfaces? I see that StaticNat is used in network elements. And StaticNatRule used elsewhere including APIs. Given that PF and FW rules uses a single interface everywhere, should a similar thing be there for static nat rules as well? -Koushik

Chip Childers Keynote and Full Schedule Announced for the Second CloudStack Collaboration Conference!

## The Program Has Been Announced!   There’s a stellar line-up of talks from various Apache CloudStack committers such as, "How to Run from a Zombie: CloudStack Distributed Process Management" by John Burwell, "SDN in CloudStack" by Hugo Trippaers, "CloudStack University” by Sebastian Goasguen and

CloudStack Community User Survey

Hi all, You may have seen Giles send out a note about a user survey that we are conducting for the community. I'd love if everyone could take a moment (it's short, I promise) to fill out the survey form to share some information about your use of CloudStack (or commercial derivatives) with us. W

Board report for June board meeting...

Hi all, Since I'm going to be on vacation until next Monday (starting Tuesday evening), I'd like to ask for help in creating the board report for this month. I've created the template here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/2013-06+Board+Report+for+Apache+CloudStack I'll hav

Re: RPM building tests in jenkins

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Prasanna Santhanam wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 04:58:45AM -0400, David Nalley wrote: >> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Prasanna Santhanam wrote: >> > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:51:12AM -0400, David Nalley wrote: >> >> Hi folks: >> >> >> >> I came across an

Re: Board report for June board meeting...

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Chip Childers wrote: > Hi all, > > Since I'm going to be on vacation until next Monday (starting Tuesday > evening), I'd like to ask for help in creating the board report for > this month. > > I've created the template here: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/di

Re: Board report for June board meeting...

On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 12:35:43PM -0400, David Nalley wrote: > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Chip Childers > wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > Since I'm going to be on vacation until next Monday (starting Tuesday > > evening), I'd like to ask for help in creating the board report for > > this month.

[ACS41] Release process update

Hi, I've edited downloads.mdtext, and committed to staging. I'll be building the DEB's and RPM's today. We have that new tomcat issue to address, which I'll do in the RPM build. I think we have a decision to make... announce 4.1 release with the permission defect or wait for a 4.1.1 to officia

Re: RPM building tests in jenkins

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 04:58:45AM -0400, David Nalley wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 2:59 AM, Prasanna Santhanam wrote: > > On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 10:51:12AM -0400, David Nalley wrote: > >> Hi folks: > >> > >> I came across an interesting problem today, and think it's one that > >> deserves fi

Re: Trouble with deployDataCenter.py

Has anyone else experience this? I just pulled in the master code into my branch and now I am getting this in my dev environment. [DEBUG] Executing command line: python ../marvin/marvin/deployDataCenter.py -i devcloud.cfg Traceback (most recent call last): File "../marvin/marvin/deployDataCente

Re: [ACS41] Release process update

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 12:41 PM, Chip Childers wrote: > Hi, > > I've edited downloads.mdtext, and committed to staging. I'll be > building the DEB's and RPM's today. > > We have that new tomcat issue to address, which I'll do in the RPM > build. I think we have a decision to make... announce 4.

Re: [ACS41] Release process update

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013, at 11:41 AM, Chip Childers wrote: > I've edited downloads.mdtext, and committed to staging. I'll be > building the DEB's and RPM's today. > > We have that new tomcat issue to address, which I'll do in the RPM > build. I think we have a decision to make... announce 4.1 relea

Re: Trouble with deployDataCenter.py

I have fixed this in a patch I submitted last week. I'm not sure when it began, but I noticed it a long time ago and had just sent out an e-mail then and corrected it in my sandbox. Let me see if I can find what I did to fix it. On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Will Stevens wrote: > Has anyon

RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

How would this vote work? Is it consensus that wins? > -Original Message- > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 9:47 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze > > Reminder to please VOTE here. T

Re: Trouble with deployDataCenter.py

In cloudstackConnection.py, I made the following change: -def marvin_request(self, cmd, response_type=None, method='GET'): +def marvin_request(self, cmd, response_type=None, method='GET', data=''): On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Mike Tutkowski < mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote: >

Re: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 05:04:54PM +, Musayev, Ilya wrote: > How would this vote work? Is it consensus that wins? As stated below: > > > > 3.4.2. Release Plan > > > > > > > > Defines the timetable and work items for a release. The plan also > > > > nominates a Release Manager. > > > > > > > >

Re: Trouble with deployDataCenter.py

Surprisingly this has been like this for a long time. It kind of makes me wonder if anyone uses DevCloud. I use it all the time. If others were using it, I would have expected this to be corrected like a month or two ago. I am "alone" in using DevCloud? On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:05 AM, Mike Tut

Re: StaticNatRule vs StaticNat

On 6/3/13 8:33 AM, "Koushik Das" wrote: >What is the difference between these interfaces? I see that StaticNat is >used in network elements. StaticNat maps user VM to the Public IP address. >And StaticNatRule used elsewhere including APIs. Legacy code. In 2.1.x version of the CS there were no

Re: [MERGE]object_store branch into master

Chip/John, This thread has become very hard to follow due to several technical debates mixed together. Chip earlier made a good suggestion that we should start separate threads for several important architectural issues raised by John so that community can get clear grasp on the debating i

Re: [ACS41] Upgrade from 2.2.14 failed

I will look into it. On 6/3/13 6:47 AM, "nicolas.lamira...@orange.com" wrote: >I create an issue : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-2822 > >-- >Nicolas Lamirault > >__ >__

Re: Trouble with deployDataCenter.py

Thanks Mike. Ya, I also did the same change locally and then did the following to not track the hack in my branch. git update-index --assume-unchanged tools/marvin/marvin/cloudstackConnection.py Thanks for submitting a patch for that. Cheers, Will On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Mike Tutko

Re: [MERGE]object_store branch into master

On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 05:09:24PM +, Min Chen wrote: > Chip/John, > > This thread has become very hard to follow due to several technical > debates mixed together. Chip earlier made a good suggestion that we should > start separate threads for several important architectural issues rais

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

I agree on merging Wei's feature first, then mine. If his feature is for KVM only, then it is a non issue as I don't support KVM in 4.2. On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 8:55 AM, Wei ZHOU wrote: > John, > > For the billing, as no one works on billing now, users need to calculate > the billing by themsel

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

Is there any plan on supporting KVM in the patch cycle post 4.2? - Original Message - From: "Mike Tutkowski" To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 10:12:32 AM Subject: Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER I agree on merging Wei's feature first, then mine. If his f

RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

+1 to extend the feature freeze date. -Original Message- From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 8:00 AM To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Subject: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze Following our discussion on the proposal to push back the feature

Re: Trouble with deployDataCenter.py

I think a lot of people use DevCloud but they don't redeploy very often so bugs like this don't get noticed. I use DevCloud all the time. On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote: > Surprisingly this has been like this for a long time. > > It kind of makes me wonder if anyone uses

Re: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Musayev, Ilya wrote: > How would this vote work? Is it consensus that wins? Consensus would win if we had it. However, we don't, thus we have a vote.

Re: [ACS41] Upgrade from 2.2.13

Nicolas, in order to upgrade to 4.0, you need to have systemvm-vmware-4.0 template pre-installed. Apache CS release notes mention it (section 3.2): http://cloudstack.apache.org/docs/en-US/Apache_CloudStack/4.0.2/html/Releas e_Notes/upgrade-instructions.html#upgrade-from-2.2.x-to-4.0 What pdf you

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

Yes, ultimately I would like to support all hypervisors that CloudStack supports. I think I'm just out of time for 4.2 to get KVM in. Right now this plug-in supports XenServer. Depending on what we do with regards to 4.2 feature freeze, I have it working for VMware in my sandbox, as well. Also, j

Re: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:00 AM, Chip Childers wrote: > Following our discussion on the proposal to push back the feature freeze > date for 4.2.0 [1], we have not yet achieved a clear consensus. Well... > we have already defined the "project rules" for figuring out what to do. > In out project b

Instructions for pushing DEB's to cloudstack.apt-get.eu

Wido, I have the access, and I have the results of building from the release source, but I don't have the knowledge to specifically know what to put where and what to run to get the non-OSS DEB's I just built into the repo. Can you share some instructions please? -chip

Re: Trouble with deployDataCenter.py

Ah, OK. I tend to re-deploy daily. :) On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Will Stevens wrote: > I think a lot of people use DevCloud but they don't redeploy very often so > bugs like this don't get noticed. I use DevCloud all the time. > > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 1:07 PM, Mike Tutkowski < > mike

Re: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

+1 (not sure if my vote counts for anything since I'm not a committer) To me it seems that many people spent a lot more time on 4.1 than expected, so I think an extra 2 - 4 weeks for 4.2 would make sense. On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 11:21 AM, David Nalley wrote: > On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:00 AM,

Re: [ACS41] Upgrade from 2.2.13

On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 05:21:40PM +, Alena Prokharchyk wrote: > Nicolas, in order to upgrade to 4.0, you need to have systemvm-vmware-4.0 > template pre-installed. Apache CS release notes mention it (section 3.2): > > http://cloudstack.apache.org/docs/en-US/Apache_CloudStack/4.0.2/html/Releas

RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

+1 to move feature freeze date to 6/28 to get in the features proposed earlier for 4.2 and have a longer bug fix cycle. After moving 103 open 4.1 targeted defects to 4.2 we will have total of 367 open defects for 4.2. I hope with this change we are able to resolve lot more defects before RC an

Re: [MERGE]object_store branch into master

Chip/Min, For thread 1, I would like to see an expanded discussion regarding the need for the staging area. In particular, what features on which hypervisors created the need for it. With the wider expertise of the list, we may be able to find solutions to these issues that either reduce or e

RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

> -Original Message- > From: Hugo Trippaers [mailto:htrippa...@schubergphilis.com] > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 2:24 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze > > -1 > > Extending the release will mean even more features will be packed into

RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

+1 [binding] Given that there are around 47 features that are still in Open state, community can focus on cleaning up that part before feature freeze date. As indicated in Chip's original mail and indicated in Animesh' s mail below, I assume that no new proposals will be accepted in to 4.2. S

Re: [ACS41] Upgrade from 2.2.13

On 6/3/13 10:30 AM, "Chip Childers" wrote: >On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 05:21:40PM +, Alena Prokharchyk wrote: >> Nicolas, in order to upgrade to 4.0, you need to have >>systemvm-vmware-4.0 >> template pre-installed. Apache CS release notes mention it (section >>3.2): >> >> >>http://cloudstack.

Re: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

On Fri, May 31, 2013, at 10:00 AM, Chip Childers wrote: > Please respond with one of the following: > > +1 : change the plan as listed above > +/-0 : no strong opinion, but leaning + or - > -1 : do not change the plan > > This vote will remain open until Tuesday morning US eastern time. -1 do no

Re: [ACS41] Upgrade from 2.2.13

On Mon, Jun 3, 2013, at 12:46 PM, Alena Prokharchyk wrote: > Yes, looks like a doc bug to me. Have to replace systemvm-vmware-3.0.5 > with systemvm-vmware-4.0 I can update this in the docs if it's not correct before I upload them tonight. Best, jzb -- Joe Brockmeier j...@zonker.net Twitter: @j

wrong dns server config?

I was troubleshooting my ssvm the other day and found '4.4.4.4' defined as the secondary dns server in /tools/devcloud/devcloud.cfg and in some other scripts. Should this be '8.8.4.4' instead since '8.8.8.8' is the one of the google dns [1]? Thanks, Shane [1] https://developers.google.co

Re: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

+1 We have spent the past one and half month working on object_store feature, it is very close to merge, just need some time to address review feedback and resolve any technical concerns. Thanks -min On 6/3/13 10:35 AM, "Sudha Ponnaganti" wrote: >+1 [binding] > >Given that there are around 47

RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

+1[binding] on pushing back feature freeze date. > -Original Message- > From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sungard.com] > Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 8:00 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze > > Following our discussion on the proposal

Re: Trouble with deployDataCenter.py

I just built the latest source code, and deployed on devcloud , everything is ok. -Wei 2013/6/3 Will Stevens > Has anyone else experience this? I just pulled in the master code into my > branch and now I am getting this in my dev environment. > > [DEBUG] Executing command line: python ../marv

Re: [MERGE]object_store branch into master

Sure. Edison will start one soon with this context information. Thanks -min On 6/3/13 10:33 AM, "John Burwell" wrote: >Chip/Min, > >For thread 1, I would like to see an expanded discussion regarding the >need for the staging area. In particular, what features on which >hypervisors created the

[DISCUSS]OBJECT_STORE branch design: Error handling in case of S3 as native secondary storage

Hi there, This thread is to address John's comments about missing error handling in S3 as secondary storage in object_store branch implementation. From previous merge email thread, I realize that we may not explain clearly in FS how S3 should work in new object_store branch, so causing several c

RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

+1 [Binding] It looks like there are a couple of last minute features that would make 4.1 a superb release. I would say that we should not allow any new features that haven't already been proposed and that the extension does not go beyond 4 weeks. If beyond that, I'm a -1. Will > -Ori

RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

+1 [binding] > -Original Message- > From: Animesh Chaturvedi [mailto:animesh.chaturv...@citrix.com] > Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 10:32 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze > > > +1 to move feature freeze date to 6/28 to get in the featur

RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

+1 [binding] --Alex > -Original Message- > From: Will Chan [mailto:will.c...@citrix.com] > Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 11:08 AM > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org > Subject: RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze > > +1 [Binding] > > It looks like there are a couple of last minute feature

Re: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

+1. 4.2 carries some important changes for the long run, giving it more time would help a smooth release in the final Kelven On 6/3/13 10:55 AM, "Edison Su" wrote: >+1[binding] on pushing back feature freeze date. > >> -Original Message- >> From: Chip Childers [mailto:chip.child...@sun

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

Mike, Can you explain why the the storage driver is hypervisor specific? Thanks, -John On Jun 3, 2013, at 1:21 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote: > Yes, ultimately I would like to support all hypervisors that CloudStack > supports. I think I'm just out of time for 4.2 to get KVM in. > > Right now this

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

Hi John, The storage plug-in - by itself - is hypervisor agnostic. The issue is with the volume-attach logic (in the agent code). The storage framework calls into the plug-in to have it create a volume as needed, but when the time comes to attach the volume to a hypervisor, the attach logic has t

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

To delve into this in a bit more detail: Prior to 4.2 and aside from one setup method for XenServer, the admin had to first create a volume on the storage system, then go into the hypervisor to set up a data structure to make use of the volume (ex. a storage repository on XenServer or a datastore

[DISCUSS]Object_Store design: S3TemplateDownloader Implementation Issues

Hi there, This thread is to address John's review comments on S3TemplateDownloader implementation. From previous thread, there are two major concerns for this class implementation. 1. We have used HttpClient library in this class. For this comment, I can explain why I need that HttpClient dur

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

Mike, It is generally odd to me that any operation in the Storage layer would understand or care about details. I expect to see the Storage services expose a set of operations that can be composed/driven by the Hypervisor implementations to allocate space/create structures per their needs. If we

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

Oh, sorry to imply the XenServer code is SolidFire specific. It is not. The XenServer attach logic is now aware of dynamic, zone-wide storage (and SolidFire is an implementation of this kind of storage). This kind of storage is new to 4.2 with Edison's storage framework changes. Edison created a

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

For example, let's say another storage company wants to implement a plug-in to leverage its Quality of Service feature. It would be dynamic, zone-wide storage, as well. They would need only implement a storage plug-in as I've made the necessary changes to the hypervisor-attach logic to support thei

Re: External Network Usage

I have spent some time looking at the usage data in the database and looking over the code. When 'bytes_in' and 'bytes_out' are reported, they are reported for a specific network. Is this only for traffic between the public and the private network? Does private traffic affect these numbers if th

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

Mike, Reading through the code, what is the difference between the ISCSI and Dynamic types? Why isn't RBD considered Dynamic? Thanks, -John On Jun 3, 2013, at 3:46 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote: > This new type of storage is defined in the Storage.StoragePoolType class > (called Dynamic): > > pu

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

This new type of storage is defined in the Storage.StoragePoolType class (called Dynamic): public static enum StoragePoolType { Filesystem(false), // local directory NetworkFilesystem(true), // NFS or CIFS IscsiLUN(true), // shared LUN, with a clusterfs overlay

Re: External Network Usage

Hi Will, Commencts inline: > Is this only for traffic between the public and the private network? yes. > Does private traffic affect these numbers if the traffic does not go through the public? No. > So if two VMs on the same network send traffic between them selves on their vlan without it bei

Re: External Network Usage

Thanks for the answers Wei. Is the public traffic broken down by public IP then? Lets say we have 3 public IPs setup on a network; the source nat ip, a port forwarding ip and a static nat ip. Would each of these ips track its own traffic and only the traffic which goes through that IP? If so, w

CloudMonkey on PyPi

Hey Rohit, Do you think that we should remove the 4.1.0-SNAPSHOT artifacts from PyPi? It's actually a higher version than 4.1.0-0 I think. -chip

[SSVM][NETWORK] Change management net to public network

I need to customize the CS to our environment needs. Since ACS at present moment does not support management network with VLAN tagging, I need to use another unused network as management vlan. We are enterprise customer and at the moment have no need for "public" network. All the natting is han

Re: [GSOC] Community Bonding Period

Hi all, My name is Meng Han. I am a Computer Engineering student at University of Florida. I am interested in distributed computing, autonomic computing, Hadoop framework and virtualization techonologies. I will be working on the project -Improve CloudStack Support in Apache Whirr and Incuba

Re: [GSOC] Community Bonding Period

On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 04:52:38PM -0400, Han,Meng wrote: > Hi all, > > My name is Meng Han. I am a Computer Engineering student at > University of Florida. I am interested in distributed computing, > autonomic computing, Hadoop framework and virtualization > techonologies. > > I will be working

RE: [VOTE] Pushback 4.2.0 Feature Freeze

+1 [ binding ] I've been concerned that releases every four months were too aggressive for people to absorb given the complexity of some deployments and upgrades. With the current 4.1 delay and 4.2 plan we would expect two major releases within two months of each other. I'd prefer a bigger da

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

As far as I know, the iSCSI type is uniquely used by XenServer when you want to set up Primary Storage that is directly based on an iSCSI target. This allows you to skip the step of going to the hypervisor and creating a storage repository based on that iSCSI target as CloudStack does that part for

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

Alternatively, you can use the PreSetup type for XenServer. In this case, you must go to XenServer and set up the storage repository (which can be based on an iSCSI target). Then you must go into CloudStack and select the PreSetup type for Primary Storage. This is like selecting the vmfs type for V

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

Mike, The current implementation of the Dynamic type attach behavior works in terms of Xen ISCSI which why I ask about the difference. Another way to ask the question -- what is the definition of a Dynamic storage pool type? Thanks, -John On Jun 3, 2013, at 5:10 PM, Mike Tutkowski wrote: >

Re: [GSOC] Community Bonding Period

Nguyen, Could you send an email with all the information like the other guys have done ? thanks, -Sebastien On May 29, 2013, at 10:35 AM, Nguyen Anh Tu wrote: > @Sebgoa: Done! My account on every page: tuna. > > Looking forward :-) > > > 2013/5/29 Sebastien Goasguen > Hi Dharmesh, Meng, I

Re: [MERGE] disk_io_throttling to MASTER

These are new terms, so I should probably have defined them up front for you. :) Static storage: Storage that is pre-allocated (ex. an admin creates a volume on a SAN), then a hypervisor data structure is created to consume the storage (ex. XenServer SR), then that hypervisor data structure is con

  1   2   >