cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Melanie Desaive <m.desa...@heinlein-support.de>
Subject Re: SystemVM Storage Tags not taken into account?
Date Thu, 07 Nov 2019 20:10:56 GMT
Thank you so much!

Worked perfectly for us. Used the procedure to reorganize our storages
and move quite a number of VRs to defined storage pools.

Am Mittwoch, den 06.11.2019, 12:10 +0000 schrieb Richard Lawley:
> I wouldn't say this is something we do routinely, mostly to correct
> mistakes at the start.  You could end up with problems if you
> deployed
> VMs based on an old version of a service offering, then changed tags
> in such a way that there was no possible location a VM could start up
> next time.
> 
> However, with a dash of common sense it should be fine to use :)
> 
> On Wed, 6 Nov 2019 at 11:52, Melanie Desaive
> <m.desaive@heinlein-support.de> wrote:
> > Hi Richard,
> > 
> > looks good. Just did an
> > 
> > update network_offerings set service_offering_id = <new service
> > offering id> where id = <id of network_offering to change>
> > 
> > and restarted one of the networks from this offering with cleanup.
> > 
> > Comes up nicely and new tags are taken into account.
> > 
> > Do you use this procedure in production to change tags and
> > parameters
> > like cpus, ram?
> > 
> > Could gain lots of flexibility if this is safely possible.
> > 
> > Greetings,
> > 
> > Melanie
> > 
> > Am Montag, den 04.11.2019, 15:45 +0000 schrieb Richard Lawley:
> > > There's nothing in the API or the UI.  We just change it in the
> > > DB.
> > > 
> > > On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 at 13:48, Melanie Desaive
> > > <m.desaive@heinlein-support.de> wrote:
> > > > Hi Richard,
> > > > 
> > > > thank you for this hint.
> > > > 
> > > > I had a look in the database, and yes, all Network Offeringns
> > > > in
> > > > the
> > > > table network_offerings still reference the old System/Disk
> > > > offering
> > > > IDs from disk_offering/system_offering.
> > > > 
> > > > Is there an intended way to change
> > > > "network_offerings.service_offering_id" for an existing network
> > > > offering? Would it be ok to update the database? Is there an
> > > > API
> > > > call?
> > > > I did not find anything in the documentation.
> > > > 
> > > > Kind regards,
> > > > 
> > > > Melanie
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Am Freitag, den 01.11.2019, 09:25 +0000 schrieb Richard Lawley:
> > > > > Melanie,
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Maybe the procedure for resetting the System Offering for
> > > > > > Virtual
> > > > > > Routers differs from that for SSVM and CP and I missed some
> > > > > > point?
> > > > > 
> > > > > The System Offering for Virtual Routers is not taken from the
> > > > > same
> > > > > place as SSVM/CP - it's set on the Network Offering instead,
> > > > > so
> > > > > you
> > > > > can have different network offerings with different system
> > > > > offerings.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Richard
> > > > > 
> > > > > On Fri, 1 Nov 2019 at 08:33, Melanie Desaive
> > > > > <m.desaive@heinlein-support.de> wrote:
> > > > > > Good morning Andrija,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > yes, I did restart mgmt. Documentation states that.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Interestingly the documentation in
> > > > > > http://docs.cloudstack.apache.org/en/4.11.1.0/adminguide/service_offerings.html#changing-the-default-system-offering-for-system-vms
> > > > > > only mentions only resetting the unique_names for Secondary
> > > > > > Storage
> > > > > > VM
> > > > > > and Console Proxy VM not for the Virtual Routers in the
> > > > > > database.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Maybe the procedure for resetting the System Offering for
> > > > > > Virtual
> > > > > > Routers differs from that for SSVM and CP and I missed some
> > > > > > point?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Greetings,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Melanie
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Am Donnerstag, den 31.10.2019, 17:19 +0100 schrieb Andrija
> > > > > > Panic:
> > > > > > > tried restarting mgmt after tag change? Usually not
> > > > > > > required
> > > > > > > but
> > > > > > > might be
> > > > > > > for systemVMs.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > On Thu, 31 Oct 2019, 15:21 Melanie Desaive, <
> > > > > > > m.desaive@mailbox.org>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I just tried to set up storage tags for System VMs,
but
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > behaviour
> > > > > > > > is not as expected. The deployment planner does not
> > > > > > > > seem to
> > > > > > > > take
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > storage tag into account when deciding over the
> > > > > > > > storage.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > The only storage with the tag "SYSTEMV" ist "ACS-LUN-
> > > > > > > > SAS-
> > > > > > > > 01'
> > > > > > > > with
> > > > > > > > id=10
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > mysql> select id,name,tag from storage_pool_view
where
> > > > > > > > cluster_name
> > > > > > > > =
> > > > > > > > 'cluster2' and status = 'Up' and tag = 'SYSTEMVM'
order
> > > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > name,tag;
> > > > > > > > +----+----------------+----------+
> > > > > > > > > id | name           | tag      |
> > > > > > > > +----+----------------+----------+
> > > > > > > > > 10 | ACS-LUN-SAS-01 | SYSTEMVM |
> > > > > > > > +----+----------------+----------+
> > > > > > > > 1 row in set (0,00 sec)
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > I definied the tag "SYSTEVM" for the System Offering
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > Virtual
> > > > > > > > Routers:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > mysql> select id,name,unique_name,type,state,tags
from
> > > > > > > > disk_offering
> > > > > > > > where type='Service' and state='Active' and unique_name
> > > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > 'Cloud.Com-SoftwareRouter' order by unique_name \G
> > > > > > > > *************************** 1. row
> > > > > > > > ***************************
> > > > > > > >          id: 281
> > > > > > > >        name: System Offering For Software Router -
With
> > > > > > > > Tags
> > > > > > > > unique_name: Cloud.Com-SoftwareRouter
> > > > > > > >        type: Service
> > > > > > > >       state: Active
> > > > > > > >        tags: SYSTEMVM
> > > > > > > > 1 row in set (0,00 sec)
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > But when I redeploy a virtual Router the deployment
> > > > > > > > planner
> > > > > > > > takes
> > > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > > storages into account. :(
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > The log saies explicitely "Pools matching tags..."
and
> > > > > > > > lists
> > > > > > > > several
> > > > > > > > other pools.
> > > > > > > > What do I miss?
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > ClusterScopeStoragePoolAllocator looking for storage
> > > > > > > > pool
> > > > > > > > Looking for pools in dc: 1  pod:1  cluster:3. Disabled
> > > > > > > > pools
> > > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > ignored.
> > > > > > > > Found pools matching tags: [Pool[7|PreSetup],
> > > > > > > > Pool[9|PreSetup],
> > > > > > > > Pool[10|PreSetup], Pool[18|PreSetup]]
> > > > > > > > ClusterScopeStoragePoolAllocator returning 3 suitable
> > > > > > > > storage
> > > > > > > > pools
> > > > > > > > ClusterScopeStoragePoolAllocator looking for storage
> > > > > > > > pool
> > > > > > > > Looking for pools in dc: 1  pod:1  cluster:3. Disabled
> > > > > > > > pools
> > > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > ignored.
> > > > > > > > Found pools matching tags: [Pool[7|PreSetup],
> > > > > > > > Pool[9|PreSetup],
> > > > > > > > Pool[10|PreSetup], Pool[18|PreSetup]]
> > > > > > > > ClusterScopeStoragePoolAllocator returning 3 suitable
> > > > > > > > storage
> > > > > > > > pools
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Kind regards,
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Melanie
> > > > > > > > 


Mime
View raw message