Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cloudstack.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy includes SPF record at
 spf.trusted-forwarder.org)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <DAD5F699-B049-4F18-94B5-9B60137810CE@gmail.com>
References: <CE72E8F9.37695%alena.prokharchyk@citrix.com>
	<CAJL+SN32BV+5TDztU3JdfPHv+adRopveaf1FphGdeU5v8O5xJw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20131003174123.GZ73023@USLT-205755.sungardas.corp>
	<CALFpzo4TiYSk7eq8dZTpy_goManmsoFkrhzh4bKws==yu5reAw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJL+SN14EFBK0AH-4jW+NcgN-gRmHgNT3+LJQRi9m6xX8215dw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJL+SN0rueK3p2EU3oTkpkCj06ZQ3wopDMUwDzFCZ5vmN1gfkw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALFpzo5NFZtzjHnf29zBrOczy-PcBKo4Aq8_WCRZN+B_d4RjeQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJL+SN3eR1TpxHT-vkt+=tRg3Vw4r3jHZ3ZfTmW0P9-wxP=jrw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJL+SN3iWwY9e+bOFO9Czww5XV4BEXdK9rW=KupNApvN4fGUtQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAJL+SN32cvZf54C4C9d45s021Qy8RJLea9ESGJCvFHwH6wZCKQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20131116031727.GA1163@cloud-2.local>
	<DAD5F699-B049-4F18-94B5-9B60137810CE@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 08:16:57 -0600
Message-ID: 
 <CAJL+SN3au0NkYidFoJ_MTw7XqXsuUdf1J2cYcQYPiF9SyKvMTg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: A question on vm migrations when hosts are set into a maintenance
 mode.
From: Alex Ough <alex.ough@sungard.com>
To: "dev@cloudstack.apache.org" <dev@cloudstack.apache.org>
Cc: Alex Huang <Alex.Huang@citrix.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0122aefe5b2ecf04eb743334

--089e0122aefe5b2ecf04eb743334
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Thank Parasanna & Sebastien,
I also got his email and sent an email.
Waiting for his reply...

Thanks
Alex Ough


On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Sebastien Goasguen <runseb@gmail.com>wrote:

> cc Alex Huang to get his attention:
>
>
> On Nov 15, 2013, at 10:17 PM, Prasanna Santhanam <tsp@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Alex, Could you just do a git blame on the file and copy the emails of
> > people who changed that bit of code? They may be able to help if Cc-ed
> > directly.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 01:49:07PM -0600, Alex Ough wrote:
> >> I hate to sending the same emails over and over again, but I really
> need to
> >> finalize this feature to be included in the next code freeze because
> this
> >> feature is very critical in our inside project.
> >>
> >> Anyone who can help, please?
> >> Thanks
> >> Alex Ough
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Alex Ough <alex.ough@sungard.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Not sure if Alex Huang checked this, but can anyone help to resolve
> this?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks
> >>> Alex Ough
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Alex Ough <alex.ough@sungard.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> It sounds a little scary...
> >>>>
> >>>> I looked at the history and found these.
> >>>>
> >>>> 8/9/ : file moved to engine by Alex Huang
> >>>> 9/16 : '_mgmtServer.getExecuteInSequence()' changed to
> >>>> 'getExecuteInSequence()' by Alex Huang
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Alex Huang,
> >>>> I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but can you check this for me?
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks
> >>>> Alex Ough
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Marcus Sorensen <
> shadowsor@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I'm not sure. I know in the past when I've seen files change
> locations
> >>>>> it has also clobbered updates to that file. Someone branched, did the
> >>>>> reorganization work, and merged, while in-between the original file
> >>>>> changed.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 9:21 AM, Alex Ough <alex.ough@sungard.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>> All,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> While merging my changes to 4.3 branch, I found that the option,
> >>>>>> 'execute.in.sequence.hypervisor.commands' is NOT used in
> >>>>> Start/Stop/Copy
> >>>>>> commands in 'VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java' any more as below.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> *StopCommand stop = new StopCommand(vm, getExecuteInSequence());*
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> *protected boolean getExecuteInSequence() {*
> >>>>>> *     return false;*
> >>>>>> *}*
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> As you see in the above, the function, 'getExecuteInSequence', just
> >>>>> returns
> >>>>>> false instead of getting the value from the global variable.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> And one more change is that the file has been moved to
> >>>>>> 'engine/orchestration/src/com/cloud/vm' from
> 'server/src/com/cloud/vm'.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Am I missing something related with this or do we stop supporting
> this
> >>>>>> option in 4.3?
> >>>>>> I'm a little confused, so please help me resolve this.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>> Alex Ough
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Alex Ough <alex.ough@sungard.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks a lot for your confirmation, Marcus.
> >>>>>>> I'll create a review request unless anyone has an objection.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>>> Alex Ough
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Marcus Sorensen <
> shadowsor@gmail.com
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I have done parallel KVM migrations without issue, it's "supposed
> to
> >>>>>>>> work". Really I think it's in the same boat as parallel
> start/stop.
> >>>>> It
> >>>>>>>> should work, but the config option is there just in case. I think
> we
> >>>>>>>> should add it.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Chip Childers
> >>>>>>>> <chip.childers@sungard.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Oct 03, 2013 at 11:44:46AM -0500, Alex Ough wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> I'm not sure what else commands 'MigrateCommand' actually
> execute
> >>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>>> addition to 'Start/Stop/CopyCommand', but can we include
> >>>>>>>> 'MigrateCommand'
> >>>>>>>>>> if it consists of only those 3 commands?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Thanks
> >>>>>>>>>> Alex Ough
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> In the case of VMware, the migrate command is executed via the
> >>>>>>>>> MigrateVMTask that's part of the VMware SDK (see
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> vmware-base/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/vmware/mo/VirtualMachineMO.java).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> For VMware, I know that vCenter will queue and process concurrent
> >>>>>>>>> requests for migrations.  Specifically, it will throttle the
> >>>>> migrations
> >>>>>>>>> happening, based on it's internal concurrency constraints, but
> the
> >>>>> task
> >>>>>>>>> queue will still accept more connections.  Obviously the risk are
> >>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> VMware layer tasks timing out if it takes too long for the task
> >>>>> queue to
> >>>>>>>>> complete.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> As for XenServer, it's happening in what appears to be a similar
> >>>>> way
> >>>>>>>>> (although the source host is the target for the migration API
> >>>>> call).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Check
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> plugins/hypervisors/xen/src/com/cloud/hypervisor/xen/resource/CitrixResourceBase.java.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I'm not familiar enough with XenServer's concurrency model for
> >>>>>>>>> migrations.  Any experts know the answer to if it can handle
> >>>>> concurrency
> >>>>>>>>> in a stable way?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> With KVM, it's obviously executing via the agent.  Similarly to
> >>>>>>>>> XenServer, I'm not familiar enough to know about concurrent
> >>>>> operations.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> So do the HV experts on the list have any opinions about
> XenServer
> >>>>> and
> >>>>>>>>> KVM migration concurrency?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> -chip
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >
> > --
> > Prasanna.,
> >
> > ------------------------
> > Powered by BigRock.com
> >
>
>
>

--089e0122aefe5b2ecf04eb743334--