cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Remi Bergsma <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Out of Band VR migration, should we reboot VR or not?
Date Wed, 03 Jun 2015 12:42:52 GMT
I think the aggregate approach is much better (missed that mail at). Great it is available
in 4.4 as well so we can fix it in both 4.4 and 4.5 in the same way.

On 03 Jun 2015, at 14:38, Koushik Das <> wrote:
> I think as a design principle we shouldn't introduce HV specific checks in the orchestration/API
> I am not sure if the problem is specific to Vmware. Any out of band VR movement can lead
to this issue. For now it is seen in Vmware but what about other HVs where CS relies on native
HA provided by HV.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Remi Bergsma [] 
> Sent: Wednesday, 3 June 2015 17:54
> To:
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Out of Band VR migration, should we reboot VR or not?
> This is a VMware specific problem, right?
> We could also limit the fix to this hypervisor only.
> Regards,
> Remi
> On 03 Jun 2015, at 14:12, Koushik Das <<>>
> In case the VR is moved out of band (say as part of Vmware DRS), all network rules are
lost. Rebooting VR from CS re-applies all the rules. Either the reboot is done manually from
UI/API or automatically as was done as part of CLOUDSTACK-7994.
> I haven't looked at the aggregate command. If it can be used to apply rules on VR without
a reboot then that should work as well.
> -Koushik
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rohit Yadav []
> Sent: Wednesday, 3 June 2015 17:18
> To: dev
> Subject: [DISCUSS] Out of Band VR migration, should we reboot VR or not?
> Hi all,
> Recently a behaviour was reported for ACS 4.5.1, where out of band VR migration would
cause rebooting of VR. It seems this is a desired behaviour as per this issue:
> It was shared on the thread on users ML that since CloudStack now supports aggregate
commands for VR, this behaviour is unnecessary.
> The VR in 4.5+ supports aggregated execution of commands on VRs to allows us to achieve
eventual consistency of VR state without actually rebooting it, see this for details:
> Please share your comments on whether if we should revert the fix or not, and the best
way to do it. Thanks.
> Regards,
> Rohit Yadav
> Software Architect, ShapeBlue
> M. +91 88 262 30892 |<>
> Blog:<> | Twitter: @_bhaisaab
> Find out more about ShapeBlue and our range of CloudStack related services
> IaaS Cloud Design & Build<>
> CSForge – rapid IaaS deployment framework<>
> CloudStack Consulting<>
> CloudStack Software Engineering<>
> CloudStack Infrastructure Support<>
> CloudStack Bootcamp Training Courses<>
> This email and any attachments to it may be confidential and are intended solely for
the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely
those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Shape Blue Ltd or related companies.
If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you must neither take any action based
upon its contents, nor copy or show it to anyone. Please contact the sender if you believe
you have received this email in error. Shape Blue Ltd is a company incorporated in England
& Wales. ShapeBlue Services India LLP is a company incorporated in India and is operated
under license from Shape Blue Ltd. Shape Blue Brasil Consultoria Ltda is a company incorporated
in Brasil and is operated under license from Shape Blue Ltd. ShapeBlue SA Pty Ltd is a company
registered by The Republic of South Africa and is traded under license from Shape Blue Ltd.
ShapeBlue is a registered trademark.

View raw message