cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kelven Yang <kelven.y...@citrix.com>
Subject Re: [Merge] CloudStack IAM branch to master
Date Sat, 15 Mar 2014 02:50:51 GMT
It is already in 4.4 as well.

Kelven

On 3/14/14, 3:58 PM, "Marcus" <shadowsor@gmail.com> wrote:

>That is, I'll pull the current 4.4 into my branch and test before I merge
>it in
>
>
>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Marcus <shadowsor@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Can we get the fix in 4.4? I'd rather sync that then master, since it
>> has been cut already.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 4:00 PM, Kelven Yang <kelven.yang@citrix.com>
>>wrote:
>>> Marcus,
>>>
>>> I¹ve pushed the fix to master already. You probably need to sync your
>>> local branch with master
>>>
>>> Kelven
>>>
>>> On 3/14/14, 11:08 AM, "Marcus" <shadowsor@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>It's in branch resize-root
>>>>
>>>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 10:47 AM, Min Chen <min.chen@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>> Marcus,
>>>>>
>>>>>         What is the latest commit you have picked up on your local
>>>>>setup from
>>>>> master? Our QA reports similar issues caused by recent VMSync bug
>>>>>fix,
>>>>> just want to make sure that your local code has that fix.
>>>>>
>>>>>         Thanks
>>>>>         -min
>>>>>
>>>>> On 3/14/14 9:37 AM, "Min Chen" <min.chen@citrix.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Before merge, I did a sanity zone and VM deployment test, and worked
>>>>>>fine
>>>>>>on my setup after fixing the issues introduced by Antonio's commit.
I
>>>>>>can
>>>>>>verify this again today. From the symptom, it seems not related to
>>>>>>IAM
>>>>>>change.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>-min
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>On 3/14/14 1:07 AM, "Marcus" <shadowsor@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>creating a new router does the same...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,446 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>>>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Unable to update
>>>>>>>VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running; updated=3;
>>>>>>>time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} New Data: {Host=1; State=Running;
>>>>>>>updated=3; time=Fri Mar 14 02:06:11 MDT 2014} Stale Data: {Host=1;
>>>>>>>State=Starting; updated=2; time=Fri Mar 14 02:05:52 MDT 2014}
>>>>>>>2014-03-14 02:06:41,448 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>>>>>(Work-Job-Executor-5:Job-41/Job-42 ctx-91928df8) Failed to start
>>>>>>>instance VM[DomainRouter|r-5-VM]
>>>>>>>com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable to
>>>>>>>transition
>>>>>>>to a new state.
>>>>>>>at
>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachi
>>>>>>>neM
>>>>>>>an
>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>gerImpl.java:1029)
>>>>>>>at
>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.advanceStart(VirtualMachineMa
>>>>>>>nag
>>>>>>>er
>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>mpl.java:775)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 2:03 AM, Marcus <shadowsor@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>> I have no idea if its related to this branch merge or not,
but I'm
>>>>>>>> unable to start the ssvm on master since I pulled about an
hour
>>>>>>>>ago.
>>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>> can deploy a fresh zone, and the ssvm will actually start,
but it
>>>>>>>> can't transition state in the DB, so it kills the vm.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,356 DEBUG [vm.dao.VMInstanceDaoImpl]
>>>>>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Unable to
update
>>>>>>>> VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]: DB Data={Host=1; State=Running;
>>>>>>>> updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014} New Data:
{Host=1;
>>>>>>>> State=Running; updated=19; time=Fri Mar 14 01:57:11 MDT 2014}
>>>>>>>>Stale
>>>>>>>> Data: {Host=1; State=Starting; updated=18; time=Fri Mar 14
>>>>>>>>01:56:38
>>>>>>>> MDT 2014}
>>>>>>>> 2014-03-14 01:57:46,359 ERROR [cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl]
>>>>>>>> (Work-Job-Executor-1:Job-33/Job-34 ctx-5fc7b113) Failed to
start
>>>>>>>> instance VM[SecondaryStorageVm|s-1-VM]
>>>>>>>> com.cloud.exception.ConcurrentOperationException: Unable
to
>>>>>>>>transition
>>>>>>>> to a new state.
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMach
>>>>>>>>ine
>>>>>>>>Ma
>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>agerImpl.java:1029)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMach
>>>>>>>>ine
>>>>>>>>Ma
>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>agerImpl.java:5129)
>>>>>>>> at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImp
>>>>>>>>l.j
>>>>>>>>av
>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>:57)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAcc
>>>>>>>>ess
>>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>>mpl.java:43)
>>>>>>>> at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.handleVmWorkJob(VmWorkJobHandler
>>>>>>>>Pro
>>>>>>>>xy
>>>>>>>>.
>>>>>>>>java:107)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.handleVmWorkJob(VirtualMachi
>>>>>>>>neM
>>>>>>>>an
>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>gerImpl.java:5274)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:10
>>>>>>>>2)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run
>>>>>>>>InC
>>>>>>>>on
>>>>>>>>t
>>>>>>>>ext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:491)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(
>>>>>>>>Man
>>>>>>>>ag
>>>>>>>>e
>>>>>>>>dContextRunnable.java:49)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.
>>>>>>>>cal
>>>>>>>>l(
>>>>>>>>D
>>>>>>>>efaultManagedContext.java:56)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.ca
>>>>>>>>llW
>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>Context(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.ru
>>>>>>>>nWi
>>>>>>>>th
>>>>>>>>C
>>>>>>>>ontext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(Ma
>>>>>>>>nag
>>>>>>>>ed
>>>>>>>>C
>>>>>>>>ontextRunnable.java:46)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run
>>>>>>>>(As
>>>>>>>>yn
>>>>>>>>c
>>>>>>>>JobManagerImpl.java:448)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:
>>>>>>>>471
>>>>>>>>)
>>>>>>>> at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:262)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecuto
>>>>>>>>r.j
>>>>>>>>av
>>>>>>>>a
>>>>>>>>:1145)
>>>>>>>> at
>>>>>>>>java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecut
>>>>>>>>or.
>>>>>>>>ja
>>>>>>>>v
>>>>>>>>a:615)
>>>>>>>> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:744)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:30 PM, Marcus <shadowsor@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Min, in looking at this branch merge, I need to be reminded
>>>>>>>>>whether
>>>>>>>>>we
>>>>>>>>> are supposed to squash feature branches when they come
in, or
>>>>>>>>>preserve
>>>>>>>>> history. It's nice to preserve history, but it's a lot
easier to
>>>>>>>>>undo
>>>>>>>>> a squashed merge.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Min Chen <min.chen@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> IAM branch is now merged to master.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/13/14 10:13 AM, "Min Chen" <min.chen@citrix.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Since we haven't heard of any objections to this
merge for 3
>>>>>>>>>>>days,
>>>>>>>>>>>I
>>>>>>>>>>>am
>>>>>>>>>>>going to merge it to master today.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Thanks
>>>>>>>>>>>-min
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>On 3/11/14 12:23 PM, "Hugo Trippaers" <hugo@trippaers.nl>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>On 11 mrt. 2014, at 19:52, Min Chen <min.chen@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also, have already run FingBugs on our
branch and addressed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>new
>>>>>>>>>>>>> findings introduced by our branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>Awesome! :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14 7:33 PM, "Min Chen" <min.chen@citrix.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No new jar dependencies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 10, 2014, at 7:22 PM,
"Chiradeep Vittal"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Chiradeep.Vittal@citrix.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Any new jar dependencies?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/10/14, 11:34 AM, "Min
Chen" <min.chen@citrix.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Prachi and I would like to
merge CloudStack Identity and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Access
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Management(IAM) plugin services
to the master branch.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Development
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>for
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this effort has been done
by Prachi and me on ACS rbac
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>branch
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>(https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;a
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=sh
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>or
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>t
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>log;
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>h
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>=r
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ef
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> s/heads/rbac).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Checklists for the merge:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1. JIRA ticket:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5920.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2. Functional Specs:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Clou
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>dSt
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ac
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>k
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>+Ide
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>n
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ti
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ty
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> +and+Access+Management+%28IAM%29+Plugin.
We have proposed
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>this
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>feature
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> back in Jan, and accommodated
all the feedbacks in our
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>implementation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3. Unit tests for the feature
are available at:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> services/iam/server/test
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (for iam server) and services/iam/plugin/test
(for iam
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>plugin).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4. Marvin integration tests
for the feature are available
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>at:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> test/integration/smoke/test_vm_iam.py.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5. Branch has been rebased
with master branch up to commit
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 63e3eea7905e22cab9466b28a2ab2a80b586aeed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6. RAT test has been passed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -min
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>

Mime
View raw message