cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Tutkowski <mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com>
Subject Re: xenserver 6.5
Date Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:51:45 GMT
Yeah, Tim, I'm a little unclear of what you mean by requiring a DB update.

Can you clarify that?

Thanks!

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:29 AM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogland@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Tim, these changes are needed? so 4.4.1 will not work with db changes... Do
> you have a commit id?
>
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Tim Mackey <tmackey@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I know that master had a bunch of cleanup work to make things work better
> > (commits were a month ago), but baring any significant issues, being able
> > to support a newer XenServer should be as simple as a database update.
> So
> > net of this master *today* should work fine with 6.5 (and the various
> > pre-release builds since beta.2).
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> > mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Someone correct me if I'm wrong but, if a previous XenServer resource
> > class
> > > can handle the newer version of XenServer, then I don't think you need
> to
> > > make any changes to CloudStack files to use that newer version.
> > >
> > > If you do see some incompatibility with that version of XenServer, then
> > > someone would need to create a new resource class to handle the
> > > discrepancies.
> > >
> > > On Monday, October 20, 2014, Adrian Lewis <adrian@alsiconsulting.co.uk
> >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Out of interest, on the assumption that there are no issues with
> using
> > > 6.5
> > > > when it's released and there are no backwards-compatibility problems,
> > > will
> > > > it then work with 4.4.1 or does CS need to be *explicitly* told that
> > > newer,
> > > > effectively unknown versions are 'acceptable' as a valid hypervisor?
> > > > Basically, If we deploy CS 4.4.1 and we like the look of XS 6.5 when
> it
> > > > comes out, will we need to make any changes to CS to start using it?
> If
> > > so,
> > > > are these simple edits to the contents of a file or would it require
> > > > rebuilding?
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Stephen Turner [mailto:Stephen.Turner@citrix.com
> <javascript:;>]
> > > > Sent: 20 October 2014 15:28
> > > > To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org <javascript:;>
> > > > Subject: RE: xenserver 6.5
> > > >
> > > > I think it should be minimal, because although there are large
> internal
> > > > changes (e.g., 3.x kernel, 64-bit dom0, new Xen, new storage
> datapath,
> > > > PVHVM
> > > > mode for RHEL/CentOS 7), the interface is essentially unchanged.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Stephen Turner
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Daan Hoogland [mailto:daan.hoogland@gmail.com <javascript:;>]
> > > > Sent: 20 October 2014 14:32
> > > > To: dev
> > > > Subject: xenserver 6.5
> > > >
> > > > Does anybody (know of) work on supporting xenserver 6.5 or has an
> idea
> > of
> > > > how much effort that is going to be?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Daan
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > *Mike Tutkowski*
> > > *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> > > e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
> > > o: 303.746.7302
> > > Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> > > <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Daan
>



-- 
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkowski@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message