Hi all,
Good point ilya but as stated by Sergey there's more thing to consider
before being able to do a proper shutdown. I augmented my script I gave you
originally and changed code in CS. What we're doing for our environment is
as follow:
1. the MGMT looks for a change in the file /etc/lb-agent
Wow, there’s been a lot of good details noted from several people on how this
process works today and how we’d like it to work in the near future.
1) Any chance this is already documented on the Wiki?
2) If not, any chance someone would be willing to do so (a flow diagram would
be particularly
Hi Ilya,
thanks for the feedback - but in "real world", you need to "understand"
that 60min is next to useless timeout for some jobs (if I understand this
specific parameter correctly ?? - job is really canceled, not only job
monitoring is canceled ???) -
My value for the "job.cancel.threshold.m
Following the protocol defined in [1], this is the notice email regarding
the removal branches from Apache CloudStack official repository. The Jira
ticket for the branches removal is
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-10354. The branches that
will be removed are the following:
- C
Hi Rafael,
I think as long as we (the CloudStack Community) have the final say on how we
fill our allotted slots in the CloudStack track of ApacheCon in Montreal, then
it’s perfectly fine for us to leverage Apache’s normal review process to gather
all the feedback from the larger Apache Communi
That is exactly it.
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 12:37 PM, Tutkowski, Mike
wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> I think as long as we (the CloudStack Community) have the final say on how
> we fill our allotted slots in the CloudStack track of ApacheCon in
> Montreal, then it’s perfectly fine for us to leverage Apa
Perfect…then, unless anyone has other opinions they’d like to share on the
topic, let’s follow that approach.
On 4/5/18, 9:43 AM, "Rafael Weingärtner" wrote:
That is exactly it.
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 12:37 PM, Tutkowski, Mike
wrote:
> Hi Rafael,
>
> I think a
Thanks for your feedback, Rafael.
I re-created my 4.12 cloud today (after fetching the latest code and using the
master branch) and still seem to be having trouble with the VR. The hypervisor
type I’m using here is XenServer 6.5.
When I examine the VR in the CloudStack GUI, the “Requires Upgrad
OK, wait a second. :)
It works now. It just took a longer time than normal.
When I examine the VR in the GUI, it no longer says it requires an upgrade and
has transitioned to the Running state.
It usually only takes a minute or so for it to come up and get into the Running
state. It took about
I am using this template for system VMs:
http://download.cloudstack.org/systemvm/4.11/systemvmtemplate-4.11.0-xen.vhd.bz2
And, right now, the ACS version I am using was built using the branch of
this PR: https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/2524. Everything seems
to be just fine here.
Could y
Marc
Thank you posting the details on how your implementation works.
Unfortunately for us - HAproxy is not an option - hence we cant take
advantage of this implementation, but please do share with the community -
perhaps it will help someone else.
I'm going to post to the bottom of this thread wi
Hi Sergey
Glad to see you are doing well,
I was gonna say drop "enterprise virtualization company" and save a
$fortune$ - but its not for everyone :)
I'll post another proposed solution to bottom of this thread.
Regards
ilya
On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 5:22 PM, Sergey Levitskiy
wrote:
> Now with
After much useful input from many of you - i realize my approach is
somewhat incomplete and possible very optimistic.
Speaking to Marcus, here is what we propose as alternate solution, i was
hoping to stay outside of the "core" - but it looks like there is no other
away around it.
Proposed functi
Andrija
This is a tough scenario.
As an admin, they way i would have handled this situation, is to advertise
the upcoming outage and then take away specific API commands from a user a
day before - so he does not cause any long running async jobs. Once
maintenance completes - enable the API comman
We still need to manage the review process and make sure that it is
adequately staffed.
The allocation of presentations to reviewers has to be managed to be
sure that the reviewers have the support that they need to do a proper
review and that the reviews get done.
Ron
On 05/04/2018 11:45
Will – What do you think? With only 26 presentations, do you think it would be
reasonable to just ask each reviewer to review each one? One time that I was on
one of these panels a couple years ago, we each reviewed the roughly dozen
presentations that were submitted. Of course, people may not b
I need to get through a couple reviews to figure out the commitment. I have
been a bit slammed at the moment.
On Thu, Apr 5, 2018, 9:19 PM Tutkowski, Mike,
wrote:
> Will – What do you think? With only 26 presentations, do you think it
> would be reasonable to just ask each reviewer to review eac
By the time you go through one and write up a commentary, you have used
quite a bit of your discretionary time.
How many days are in the review period?
How many reviewers have volunteered?
I would hope that key organizers of the conference are only reviewing
finalists where the author has al
Hi Ron,
We (mainly Giles and Will, from what I am aware) are still in the process of
finalizing how many rooms we get and for how long, so – unfortunately – we
can’t answer your questions at least at this time.
We’re making progress on that front, though.
Thanks,
Mike
On 4/5/18, 10:28 PM, "Ro
19 matches
Mail list logo
