Thanks, but I do not think that is the issue. Other datastore types, excepting systems datastores, come up with space on the same mounts points.
-- Marius Rex [email protected] Senior linux Engineer cell# 347.565.5037 On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 18:36 -0400, Ruben S. Montero wrote: > Could it be the mount points? Datastores on the hosts have to be > mounted under DATASTORE_LOCATION as defined in oned.conf (defaults > to /var/lib/one/datastores). Note that BASE_PATH refers to the path > used to store the images when they are resitered (not needed for a > system ds). Roughly you go from BASE_PATH/<image_uuid> in the > datastore to DATASTORE_LOCATION/<DS_ID>/<VM_ID>/disk.0 in the > hypervisor. > > > The monitoring probes (take a look to monitor_ds.sh > in /var/lib/one/remotes) looks for DATASTORE_LOCATION, not > BASE_PATH... > > > Cheers > > > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Marius Rex <[email protected]> > wrote: > On Fri, 2014-04-25 at 08:36 -0400, Stefan Kooman wrote: > > Quoting Ruben S. Montero ([email protected]): > > > That's right Stefan > > > > > > System DS are monitored through the host (so we can > accommodate ssh system > > > ds and other types that cannot be accessed from the > front-end). If no host > > > is reporting space for the System DS size will be 0. > > > > Check, thanks for confirming. @MariusRex, so then the > question is: why > > aren't your host monitoring the system datastore? > > > > Gr. Stefan > > > > > I do have a healthy hypervisor which is being monitored, which > has both > shared NFS volumes. > > [oneadmin@snow-opennebula01 ~]$ onehost list > ID NAME CLUSTER RVM ALLOCATED_CPU > ALLOCATED_MEM > STAT > 0 kvmhost04 snowman 0 0 / 800 (0%) 0K / > 66.9G (0%) > update > > > Having looked in oned.log I see no reference to the original > system > volume being mentioned. But the second system volume I > created is being > successfully monitored: > > # grep system oned.log | tail > Wed Apr 23 20:09:27 2014 [ImM][D]: Datastore systems_nfs (100) > successfully monitored. > Wed Apr 23 20:10:27 2014 [InM][D]: Monitoring datastore > systems_nfs > (100) > Wed Apr 23 20:10:27 2014 [ImM][D]: Datastore systems_nfs (100) > successfully monitored. > Wed Apr 23 20:11:27 2014 [InM][D]: Monitoring datastore > systems_nfs > (100) > Wed Apr 23 20:11:27 2014 [ImM][D]: Datastore systems_nfs (100) > successfully monitored. > Wed Apr 23 20:13:30 2014 [ReM][D]: Req:704 UID:0 > DatastoreAllocate > invoked, "NAME = systems_nf...", -1 > Wed Apr 23 20:14:26 2014 [ReM][D]: Req:2752 UID:0 > DatastoreAllocate > invoked, "NAME = systems_nf...", 100 > Wed Apr 23 20:15:39 2014 [ReM][D]: Req:3920 UID:0 > DatastoreAllocate > invoked, "NAME = systems_nf...", 100 > Wed Apr 23 20:42:18 2014 [ReM][D]: Req:704 UID:0 > DatastoreAllocate > invoked, "NAME = systems_nf...", 100 > Thu Apr 24 21:58:56 2014 [ReM][D]: Req:2176 UID:0 > DatastoreAllocate > invoked, "NAME = systems_nf...", 100 > > > But systems_nfs reports have no space available either. (As > seen in my > original query.) > > > -- > Marius Rex > [email protected] > Senior linux Engineer > cell# 347.565.5037 > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org > > > > > > -- > -- > > Ruben S. Montero, PhD > Project co-Lead and Chief Architect > OpenNebula - Flexible Enterprise Cloud Made Simple > www.OpenNebula.org | [email protected] | @OpenNebula _______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opennebula.org/listinfo.cgi/users-opennebula.org
