Congrats Boris !!
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 12:10 AM, ilya wrote:
> Warm welcome Boris..
>
> On 1/19/16 4:15 AM, Wilder Rodrigues wrote:
> > The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache CloudStack is pleased
> to
> > announce that Boris Roman Schrijver has accepted our invitation to join
> th
Hi Daniel,
It is possible to have the MAC-IP pair in the switch arp cache. You can use
arping from your new NFS server to send gratious arp request, so that the
switch can update the MAC address in its arp cache.
Thanks,
Sanjeev
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 1:47 PM, Daniel Mezentsev wrote:
> Igor,
LGTM !!
test1_coreos_VM_creation
(integration.component.test_coreos.TestDeployVmWithCoreosTemplate) ... ===
TestName: test1_coreos_VM_creation | Status : SUCCESS ===
ok
--
Ran 1 test in 754.205s
OK
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 4:29 P
Is it okay to merge this PR or we need to wait for two LGTMs, since
original PR 667 already has two LGTMs ?
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:59 PM, remibergsma wrote:
> Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1411#issuecomment-183226537
>
@remibergsma, I did not notice that there were two commits in it. I only
looked at the modified content of the file.
Thanks for reverting it.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 1:00 AM, remibergsma wrote:
> Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/
LGTM based on PR#667
On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 5:37 PM, DaanHoogland wrote:
> Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1411#issuecomment-184182132
>
> @sanjeevneelarapu If you LGTM this there are 2 LGTM here so please go
> ahead
Hi Nux,
Can you please convert this template to .ova format , so that tests can run
on vmware.
http://dl.openvm.eu/cloudstack/macchinina/x86_64/macchinina-vmware.vmdk.bz2
Thanks,
Sanjeev
On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 5:42 PM, Raja Pullela
wrote:
> Nux, I will provide you the files and if you can upl
Expunging is the final state of the vm. We don't have expunged state.
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Daan Hoogland
wrote:
> I ran into that as well, a while ago. IMNSHO the VM record should be
> deleted after the state expunging, so a state of expunged would never make
> sense. Deabatable of
One of the reasons for VR not to come up is, once CS creates VR on
hypervisor, it does a ping on VR's management interface for centain no.of
of times. If it does not receive any response then it will shut down the
VR.
So when VR is coming up check its console and see any network issues.
On Tue, A
Hi Devender,
IIRC some changes have been made in this area in recent releases. So first
ip address in the cidr would not be treated as valid ip address for
assignment since it is a network id. So /31 would not have sufficient ips
to deploy vm.
Thanks,
Sanjeev
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Si
Not sure when this check was added excatly :(
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 1:12 AM, Remi Bergsma
wrote:
> Exactly!
> Left my mail in outbox and missed your reply ;-)
>
> @Sanjeev, since you answered the original mail.. Do you know when/where
> this check was added? Or else I’ll search for it. Let’s o
No issues with S3 provider.
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Andrija Panic
wrote:
> auth v1, old libraries, lot's of limitations (cant extract/download
> ISO/template from ACS, dont see if register/download of ISO/template from
> URL has started at all - no progress percentage, etc). Problems d
st be only 1 nfs box(that will ve converted to staging
> store)?
> Thx
> On May 29, 2015 11:02 AM, "Sanjeev N" wrote:
>
> > No issues with S3 provider.
> >
> > On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 12:48 PM, Andrija Panic >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > a
Agree with Gaurav,
We should look at the tests which are changing the storage pool status. We
should make sure that those tests turn the status back to UP.
-Sanjeev
On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 1:05 PM, gauravaradhye wrote:
> Github user gauravaradhye commented on a diff in the pull request:
>
>
Please ignore my comment. I confirmed with Kishan and he said template
creation from volume is not supported in LXC.
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 5:45 PM, sanju1010 wrote:
> Github user sanju1010 commented on a diff in the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/506#discussion
LGTM. I am taking this patch.
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 6:26 PM, nitt10prashant wrote:
> GitHub user nitt10prashant opened a pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/507
>
> CLOUDSTACK-8577: fixing script testpath_disable_enable_zone
>
> disable enable cluster ... =
Hi,
travis/script.sh uses following nose command to pick the tests.
nosetests --with-xunit --xunit-file=integration-test-results/$suite.xml
--with-marvin --marvin-config=setup/dev/advanced.cfg
test/integration/$suite.py -s -a tags=advanced,required_hardware=false
--zone=Sandbox-simulator --hypervi
@kishankavala,
Big no , because simulator regression suite takes almost 6 hours to
complete.
On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 11:24 AM, kishankavala wrote:
> Github user kishankavala commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/920#issuecomment-147944007
>
> @runse
I will update the PR with required changes suggested by @pvr9711.
On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 11:36 PM, remibergsma wrote:
> Github user remibergsma commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/902#issuecomment-150838537
>
> @sanju1010 Any update on this?
>
>
The reason for these two failures is VPC creation itself is failing. Reason
being "SSH access to VR on 3922 port using its management ip address" is
failing. Hence failure in VR start. This looks like product bug to me.
-Sanjeev
On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Raja Pullela
wrote:
> Super, tha
I looked at the changes Priti has done in this PR. It looks good to me.
LGTM!!
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 11:00 AM, pritisarap12 wrote:
> GitHub user pritisarap12 opened a pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1000
>
> CLOUDSTACK-9005: Modifying tearDown function
>
>
This is very small change related to list validation and it looks good.
LGTM!!
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:28 AM, bhaisaab wrote:
> Github user bhaisaab commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/994#issuecomment-151733973
>
> Officially we're over 9000
tails, so we can find the difference?
>
> What hypervisor, management server, other environmental properties. Please
> also share the full logs (you may also send them to me private, if you
> don’t want to publish them). Then we can investigate.
>
> Regards,
> Remi
>
>
>
&
In case of VMWare and Hyper-v , linc local is on eth1. So the command in
all the failed tests to verify link local IP should be modified.
"cat /var/cache/cloud/cmdline | xargs | sed \"s/ /\\n/g\" | grep eth0ip= |
sed \"s/\=/ /g\" | awk '{print $2}'",.
It is using eth0ip. However, it should be eth1i
cloudstack/pull/1026
>
> Cheers,
> Wilder
>
>
> On 03 Nov 2015, at 10:59, Wilder Rodrigues <mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com>> wrote:
>
> Thanks for the details, Sanjeev.
>
> Fixing the test now. PR to follow.
>
> Cheers,
> Wilder
>
> On
template.download will periodically check for the template download status.
I didn't test it but it is a small change. So LGTM!!
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 7:16 PM, michaelandersen wrote:
> Github user michaelandersen commented on a diff in the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudst
Nux,
When you say SNAT is it SourceNAT IP address or you have acquired IP
address and trying VPN on it? If later is the case then it won't work.
-Sanjeev
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Jayapal Reddy Uradi <
jayapalreddy.ur...@citrix.com> wrote:
> When I test last time remote access vpn and s2
Please let me know if there are any issues with Marvin? I can look into it.
On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:58 PM, Daan Hoogland
wrote:
> thanks Abhi,
>
> On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 1:14 PM, Abhinandan Prateek <
> abhinandan.prat...@shapeblue.com> wrote:
>
> > AFAIK, Santhosh and Gaurav were the last few l
@daanhoogland I have updated the validation steps.
On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:46 PM, DaanHoogland wrote:
> Github user DaanHoogland commented on a diff in the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1122#discussion_r46391214
>
> --- Diff: test/integration/component/test
@michaelandersen, if we want to use that template it only works for kvm. So
either we have to skip the tests for other hypervisors or make the similar
templates for all other hypervisors as well.
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 2:00 AM, michaelandersen wrote:
> Github user michaelandersen commented on th
@terbolour, as per the previous logic in the test, it will register
xenserver template for any hypervisor other than kvm and vm deployment
fails for other hypervisors like vmware,hyper-v and lxc.
So I was asking how we should handle this.
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 12:44 PM, terbolous wrote:
> Githu
Thanks @michaelandersen, I will take those templates and make the test
generic.
On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 3:35 PM, michaelandersen wrote:
> Github user michaelandersen commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1156#issuecomment-162837936
>
> Gotcha. We cou
@wilder, I am ok with it. You can take it over.
One comment, is ostype "Other PV (64-bit)" valid for other hypervisors
otherthan Xenserver? And vmware template format should be in .ova
The one you have mentioned in the Services class won't work.
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 2:03 PM, wilderrodrigues wr
@Wilder, forgot to mention, either we should also add template for LXC or
skip the test for LXC.
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Sanjeev N wrote:
> @wilder, I am ok with it. You can take it over.
> One comment, is ostype "Other PV (64-bit)" valid for other hypervisors
>
if required_hardware=false means these tests can run on Simulator.
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:06 PM, runseb wrote:
> Github user runseb commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/532#issuecomment-117977659
>
> @gauravaradhye if you answer my questions I ca
I thought there is a limitation on LGTMs for integration tests?
On Wed, Jul 8, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Daan Hoogland
wrote:
> guys and dolss,
>
> this was closed with only 1 LGTM! we agreed not to submit with less
> then two ok reviews on master. So next steps? revert? some extra
> justification or els
LGTM!! I am taking this patch.
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 3:25 PM, pavanb018 wrote:
> Github user pavanb018 commented on a diff in the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/569#discussion_r34239937
>
> --- Diff: test/integration/component/test_blocker_bugs.py ---
>
LGTM
On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 11:02 AM, nitt10prashant wrote:
> GitHub user nitt10prashant opened a pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/579
>
> CLOUDSTACK-8626 :[Automation]fixing test/integration/component/test_p…
>
> …s_max_limits.py for lxc hypervisor
>
>
You are right Wido. It is only a test case change to handle volume cleanup.
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:43 AM, wido wrote:
> Github user wido commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/481#issuecomment-121140868
>
> The description of the pull request isn
LGTM!!
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 11:47 AM, pavanb018 wrote:
> GitHub user pavanb018 opened a pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/581
>
> Newb
>
> Test Create/Delete a LB rule and verify correct usage is recorded ...
> === TestName: test_01_lb_usage | Status : SU
LGTM!!
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 5:08 PM, DaanHoogland wrote:
> Github user DaanHoogland commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/585#issuecomment-121211124
>
> I agree with Sanju. please ammend to something like
> CLOUDSTACK-8631: changing if condit
LGTM
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 2:04 PM, pritisarap12 wrote:
> Github user pritisarap12 commented on a diff in the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/592#discussion_r34656988
>
> --- Diff: test/integration/testpaths/testpath_custom_disk_offering.py
> ---
> @@ -0
LGTM
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 3:29 PM, pritisarap12 wrote:
> GitHub user pritisarap12 opened a pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/594
>
> CLOUDSTACK-8637: Verify that VM with same Display name creation fails
> if vm.instancename.flag=true
>
> When vm.instancen
I was trying to bring up MS with xencluster.
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 4:10 PM, pvr9712 wrote:
> Github user pvr9712 commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/591#issuecomment-121571026
>
> BTW, here is my email on the Dev list with the details for this i
LGTM
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 11:34 AM, wilderrodrigues
wrote:
> Github user wilderrodrigues commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/590#issuecomment-121843137
>
> LGTM
>
>
> ---
> If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have
Can somebody please review this PR?
On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 5:58 PM, sanju1010 wrote:
> GitHub user sanju1010 opened a pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/586
>
> CLOUDSTACK-8634: Made changes to test_security_group.py test suite to
> support EIP
>
>
> Made ch
Hi,
In latest build with ACS master, VR creation fails in basic zone.
Created a blocker bug for this. More details @
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-8668
Thanks,
Sanjeev
LGTM!!
On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 11:34 AM, pritisarap12 wrote:
> Github user pritisarap12 commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/613#issuecomment-123986839
>
> Updated the testcase as per review comments.
>
>
> ---
> If your project is set up for it,
LGTM!!
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 12:11 PM, pritisarap12 wrote:
> Github user pritisarap12 commented on a diff in the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/619#discussion_r35508814
>
> --- Diff: test/integration/testpaths/testpath_queryAsyncJobResult.py
> ---
> @@
Hi,
In latest ACS builds, the ip table rules in VR have ACCEPT as the default
policy in INPUT and FORWARD chains, instead of DROP.
Created a blocker bug for this issue
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-8688
Can somebody please fix it?
Thanks,
Sanjeev
>
> > Thanks,
> > Jayapal
> >
> > On 30-Jul-2015, at 12:28 PM, Daan Hoogland
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I changed it to critical. It is only a blocker if we agree on this
> >> list that it is.
> >>
> >> On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 6:44 AM, S
t;
>
> > On 30 Jul 2015, at 14:09, Sanjeev N wrote:
> >
> > Agree with Kishan Kavala and Jayapal.
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 2:13 PM, Kishan Kavala >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> This is a security issue with high impact.
> >> W
How your logic works if there are no system vms on a host (ssvm, cpvm and
VR)? I mean if the cluster has more than one host and system vms were
deployed on another host in the cluster?
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 2:01 PM, pritisarap12 wrote:
> Github user pritisarap12 commented on a diff in the pull
LGTM
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 4:42 PM, nitt10prashant wrote:
> Github user nitt10prashant commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/638#issuecomment-126656909
>
> LGTM
>
>
>
> ---
> If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have y
LGTM!!
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 11:46 AM, pritisarap12 wrote:
> Github user pritisarap12 commented on a diff in the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/631#discussion_r36058447
>
> --- Diff: test/integration/testpaths/testpath_attach_disk_zwps.py ---
> @@ -0,0
pt source destination
>all -- anywhere anywhere
>all -- anywhere anywhere
>tcp -- anywhere anywhere
> tcp -- anywhere anywhere
> root@r-4-VM:~#
>
> I will compare the new
LGTM!!
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 11:34 AM, pritisarap12 wrote:
> GitHub user pritisarap12 opened a pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/668
>
>
> CLOUDSTACK-8693-Adding-missing-code-in-testpath_same_vm_name.py_testpath
>
> -Adding "cls.hypervisor = cls.testClient.ge
LGTM!!
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 4:56 PM, pritisarap12 wrote:
> Github user pritisarap12 commented on a diff in the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/675#discussion_r36734678
>
> --- Diff: test/integration/testpaths/testpath_usage.py ---
> @@ -2879,6 +2882,60
LGTM!!
On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 3:01 PM, bhaisaab wrote:
> Github user bhaisaab commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/688#issuecomment-134918074
>
> LGTM
>
>
> ---
> If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
> reply
I would be happy to lend my hand in generalizing the BVT Infra.
-Sanjeev
On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Raja Pullela
wrote:
> Rohit, not sure about the efforts required to do this. Can certainly work
> with you or someone to do this. Please let me know,
>
> best,
> Raja
> From: Rohit Yadav
@pavanb018 good catch !! It is not part of the code but will change.
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 10:52 AM, pavanb018 wrote:
> Github user pavanb018 commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/871#issuecomment-142497091
>
> @Desc: Test that Volume snapshot for
LGTM!!
On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 2:15 PM, pavanb018 wrote:
> Github user pavanb018 commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/683#issuecomment-142531937
>
> The result of operation is captured in the list volume validation
> following the call to query_asy
I have a concern here. Some of us are actively involved in reviewing the
PRs related to marvin tests(Enhancing existing tests/Adding new tests). If
we have to test a PR it requires an environment to be created with actual
resources and this is going to take lot of time. Some of the tests can run
on
LGTM !!
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 12:46 PM, pritisarap12 wrote:
> Github user pritisarap12 commented on the pull request:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1218#issuecomment-185067571
>
> Testcase result after modifications:
>
> Dedicated cluster and router allocation ... =
Test Results:
snapshot hardning ... === TestName: test_01_snapshot_hardning_kvm | Status
: : SUCCESS ===
ok
--
Ran 1 test in 1477.688s
OK
LGTM!!
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 3:02 PM, pritisarap12 wrote:
> Github user pritisarap12
Hi Steve,
Currently travis runs all simulator tests(marvin tests which does not
require any hardware, tagged with requierd_hardware=false) on every PR. If
any test fails it updates the PR and marks it red. IMO apart from 2 LGTMs
travis test pass is also mandatory for PR merge.
Thanks,
Sanjeev N
101 - 166 of 166 matches
Mail list logo
