Zone-wide NFS storage ? in this case the SQL returns no results (cluster_id field in table is NULL)
On 5 June 2018 at 17:16, Jon Marshall <[email protected]> wrote: > No problem. > > > I am leaving work now but will test first thing tomorrow and get back to > you. > > > I definitely have NFS storage as far as I can tell ! > > > ________________________________ > From: Rafael Weingärtner <[email protected]> > Sent: 05 June 2018 16:13 > To: users > Subject: Re: advanced networking with public IPs direct to VMs > > That is interesting. Let's see the source of all truth... > This is the code that is generating that odd message. > > > List<StoragePoolVO> clusterPools = > > _storagePoolDao.listPoolsByCluster(agent.getClusterId()); > > boolean hasNfs = false; > > for (StoragePoolVO pool : clusterPools) { > > if (pool.getPoolType() == StoragePoolType.NetworkFilesystem) > { > > hasNfs = true; > > break; > > } > > } > > if (!hasNfs) { > > s_logger.warn( > > "Agent investigation was requested on host " + agent > + > > ", but host does not support investigation because it has no NFS storage. > > Skipping investigation."); > > return Status.Disconnected; > > } > > > > There are two possibilities here. You do not have any NFS storage? Is that > the case? Or maybe, for some reason, the call > "_storagePoolDao.listPoolsByCluster(agent.getClusterId())" is not > returning > any NFS storage pools. Looking at the "listPoolsByCluster " we will see > that the following SQL is used: > > Select * from storage_pool where cluster_id = <host'sClusterId> and removed > > is not null > > > > Can you run that SQL to see the its return when your hosts are marked as > disconnected? > > On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Jon Marshall <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I reran the tests with the 3 NIC setup. When I configured the zone > through > > the UI I used the labels cloudbr0 for management, cloudbr1 for guest > > traffic and cloudbr2 for NFS as per my original response to you. > > > > > > When I pull the power to the node (dcp-cscn2.local) after about 5 mins > > the host status goes to "Alert" but never to "Down" > > > > > > I get this in the logs - > > > > > > 2018-06-05 15:17:14,382 WARN [c.c.h.KVMInvestigator] > > (AgentTaskPool-1:ctx-f4da4dc9) (logid:138e9a93) Agent investigation was > > requested on host Host[-4-Routing], but host does not support > investigation > > because it has no NFS storage. Skipping investigation. > > 2018-06-05 15:17:14,382 DEBUG [c.c.h.HighAvailabilityManagerImpl] > > (AgentTaskPool-1:ctx-f4da4dc9) (logid:138e9a93) KVMInvestigator was able > to > > determine host 4 is in Disconnected > > 2018-06-05 15:17:14,382 INFO [c.c.a.m.AgentManagerImpl] > > (AgentTaskPool-1:ctx-f4da4dc9) (logid:138e9a93) The agent from host 4 > state > > determined is Disconnected > > 2018-06-05 15:17:14,382 WARN [c.c.a.m.AgentManagerImpl] > > (AgentTaskPool-1:ctx-f4da4dc9) (logid:138e9a93) Agent is disconnected but > > the host is still up: 4-dcp-cscn2.local > > > > I don't understand why it thinks there is no NFS storage as each compute > > node has a dedicated storage NIC. > > > > > > I also don't understand why it thinks the host is still up ie. what test > > is it doing to determine that ? > > > > > > Am I just trying to get something working that is not supported ? > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Rafael Weingärtner <[email protected]> > > Sent: 04 June 2018 15:31 > > To: users > > Subject: Re: advanced networking with public IPs direct to VMs > > > > What type of failover are you talking about? > > What ACS version are you using? > > What hypervisor are you using? > > How are you configuring your NICs in the hypervisor? > > How are you configuring the traffic labels in ACS? > > > > On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Jon Marshall <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all > > > > > > > > > I am close to giving up on basic networking as I just cannot get > failover > > > working with multiple NICs (I am not even sure it is supported). > > > > > > > > > What I would like is to use 3 NICs for management, storage and guest > > > traffic. I would like to assign public IPs direct to the VMs which is > > why I > > > originally chose basic. > > > > > > > > > If I switch to advanced networking do I just configure a guest VM with > > > public IPs on one NIC and not both with the public traffic - > > > > > > > > > would this work ? > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Rafael Weingärtner > > > > > > -- > Rafael Weingärtner > -- Andrija Panić
