cloudstack-issues mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "ASF GitHub Bot (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (CLOUDSTACK-9827) Storage tags stored in multiple places
Date Fri, 10 Mar 2017 01:01:39 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9827?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15904184#comment-15904184
] 

ASF GitHub Bot commented on CLOUDSTACK-9827:
--------------------------------------------

Github user nvazquez commented on the issue:

    https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/1994
  
    Hi @rafaelweingartner, you're right, it was basically that fix. 
    I've pushed another commit due to issue reported by @mike-tutkowski in mailing list:
    
    I have an NFS SR as primary storage under CloudStack with a storage tag of NFS-A. I have
a compute offering with a matching storage tag. I can’t seem to get a VM to spin up, however:
It says insufficient capacity. The CPU, MHz, and memory are all low (and what I typically
use), so I think the problem is with matching the storage tag.


> Storage tags stored in multiple places
> --------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CLOUDSTACK-9827
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9827
>             Project: CloudStack
>          Issue Type: Bug
>      Security Level: Public(Anyone can view this level - this is the default.) 
>          Components: Management Server
>    Affects Versions: 4.10.0.0
>         Environment: N/A
>            Reporter: Mike Tutkowski
>            Assignee: Nicolas Vazquez
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: 4.10.0.0
>
>
> I marked this as a Blocker because it concerns me that we are not handling storage tags
correctly in 4.10 and, as such, VM storage might get placed in locations that users don't
want.
> From e-mails I sent to dev@ (most recent to oldest):
> If I add a new primary storage and give it a storage tag, the tag ends up in storage_pool_details.
> If I edit an existing storage pool’s storage tags, it places them in storage_pool_tags.
> **********
> I believe I have found another bug (one that we should either fix or examine in detail
before releasing 4.10).
> It looks like we have a new table: cloud.storage_pool_tags.
> The addition of this table seems to have broken the listStorageTags API command. When
this command runs, it doesn’t pick up any storage tags for me (and I know I have one storage
tag).
> This data used to be stored in the cloud.storage_pool_details table. It’s good to put
it in its own table, but will our upgrade process move the existing tags from storage_pool_details
to storage_pool_tags?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Mime
View raw message