Mailing-List: contact issues-help@cloudstack.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 18:14:11 +0000 (UTC)
From: "ASF GitHub Bot (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: cloudstack-issues@incubator.apache.org
Message-ID: <JIRA.12664083.1376666051000.337810.1449857651089@Atlassian.JIRA>
In-Reply-To: <JIRA.12664083.1376666051000@Atlassian.JIRA>
References: <JIRA.12664083.1376666051000@Atlassian.JIRA>
 <JIRA.12664083.1376666051748@arcas>
Subject: [jira] [Commented] (CLOUDSTACK-4374) As a Developer I want to have
 HA enabled for routers that are part or a redundant network or VPC
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4374?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15053129#comment-15053129 ] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on CLOUDSTACK-4374:
--------------------------------------------

GitHub user wilderrodrigues opened a pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1222

    CLOUDSTACK-4374 - As a Developer I want to have HA enabled for routers that are part or a redundant network or VPC

    This PR fixes the issue we were facing with crashed redundant routers not being picked up by the HA monitor due to an IF statement in the code.
    
    * Redundant Routers are not the same as Haigh Available. Having a router HA is actually saying that the given router will be controlled by the High Availability monitor. Hence fix any problem we might face.

You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

    $ git pull https://github.com/ekholabs/cloudstack fix/rvr-ha-CLOUDSTACK-4374

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

    https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1222.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

    This closes #1222
    
----
commit 0d075906ad40b0bd681ece777045684379ba93a5
Author: Wilder Rodrigues <wrodrigues@schubergphilis.com>
Date:   2015-12-11T06:51:22Z

    CLOUDSTACK-4374 - Adds HA capabilities to redundant routers
    
       - Redundant Routers are not the same as Haigh Available.
         Having a router HA is actually saying that the given router will be controlled by the High Availability monitor.
         Hence fix any problem we might face.

----


> As a Developer I want to have HA enabled for routers that are part or a redundant network or VPC
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CLOUDSTACK-4374
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4374
>             Project: CloudStack
>          Issue Type: Bug
>      Security Level: Public(Anyone can view this level - this is the default.) 
>          Components: Virtual Router
>    Affects Versions: 4.1.0, 4.4.0, 4.5.0, 4.6.0, 4.6.1
>            Reporter: Roeland Kuipers
>            Assignee: Wilder Rodrigues
>             Fix For: 4.7.0
>
>
> We provide redundant routers with HA functionality through a special service offering.
> However these router pairs are provisioned with ha_enabled=0, so when one or both of them fail they will never be restarted by CS. 
> 2013-08-16 15:51:16,101 DEBUG [cloud.ha.HighAvailabilityManagerImpl] (HA-Worker-0:work-4335) VM is not HA enabled so we're done.
> This is currently hardcoded in VirtualNetworkApplianceManagerImpl.java @ 1633
>    boolean offerHA = routerOffering.getOfferHA();
>                 /* We don't provide HA to redundant router VMs, admin should own it all, and redundant router themselves are HA */
>                 if (isRedundant) {
>                     offerHA = false;
>                 }
> We like redundancy and like to have HA on our redundant routers. We like to configure this ourselves through service offerings and do not like being helt hostage by these lines of codes:) We do like to own it all in our admin role :)
> Besides this, this is also very counter-intuitive as we were expecting HA on our redundant routers, since it was configured on their service offering.
> So can we get rid of these lines of code? And have this controlled through service offerings as it should IMHO.? Unless this has negative impact which we are not aware off?
> Cheers & Thanks,
> Roeland
> Details of the original commit which injected this code:
> Commit: a269b089ae38d0d04db2fa0f4c8e839480476ddc [a269b08]
> Parents: a2cc66ce41
> Author: Sheng Yang <sheng.yang@cloud.com>
> Date: 17 december 2011 03:52:59 CET
> Commit Date: 19 december 2011 22:29:48 CET
> bug 12608: NaaS: Don't shutdown elements if cleanup=false
> We can use the restartNetwork mechanism to recover the disconnected redundant
> router.
> Also disable HA for redundant router. Admin would take responsibilty to recover
> the failure router, because redundant routers themselves are one layer HA.
> status 12608: resolved fixed


--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)