cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Richard Lawley <rich...@richardlawley.com>
Subject Re: SystemVM Storage Tags not taken into account?
Date Mon, 04 Nov 2019 15:45:54 GMT
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