cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexey Zilber <alexeyzil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: CS 3.0.2 does not report router system vm.
Date Sat, 23 Jun 2012 02:50:46 GMT
Well, yes and no (to your deployment model point).  Say you set KVM first
(which I did before).  According to the docs, KVM doesn't support local
storage, so it's left disabled.  Then, Xen is added, and local storage
support is turned on.  At which point, CS will blow up.  Turning it back
off won't fix things.  Removing Xen won't fix things, so that's certainly
an issue.  I don't think local storage should even be an option considering
how scary it is.  If, on the other hand, you start off with Xen, turn the
local storage options on, then do an advanced install, it'll work.  That
is, until you add something that doesn't support local storage.

I think the local storage support should be per-cluster, not global.  For
some reason I think it really chokes when you mix clusters that have mixed
support for local storage.

But anyway, now that I'm not using local storage at all, things are
actually stable and running ok with two hypervisors.   It's just my luck
that when I first jumped into CS I was like 'oh wow, I can just use local
storage!' and I focused on fighting it to set it up, which wasted a ton of
time.

So yeah, local storage should either be pulled, or documented that it's not
fully supported/buggy.  Other then that, CS 3.0.2 is finally running ok.

Thanks!
-Alexey

On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 2:31 AM, Ahmad Emneina <Ahmad.Emneina@citrix.com>wrote:

> Typically people would not switch deployment models, in production,
> without testing on some staging/preproduction environment. Alexey has a
> valid gripe here in that certain flags can cause unwanted or even buggy
> behavior.
>
> On 6/22/12 7:39 AM, "Alexey Zilber" <alexeyzilber@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Hi,
> >
> >  Yes, that solution did not work.  I think though in that particular case
> >the issue was different (it was about 4-5 installs back).  The only
> >service
> >offering that seems relevant is a compute offering that uses either shared
> >or local storage.  I had both types setup and neither worked, so I think
> >there was something further wrong with that particular setup.  Local
> >storage just doesn't work for me.  I believe I did get it running just
> >once, but it wasn't stable.  I've also had issues with the router vm
> >coming
> >up on local storage.. go figure.
> >  I'm curious to see if anyone is actually using local storage with
> >multiple hosts and/or hypervisors.   Either way, things seem to work much
> >better when local storage is not enabled.  I should be done with a new
> >setup without local storage, we'll see how that turns out.
> >
> >-Alex
> >
> >On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Tamas Monos <tamasm@veber.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Have you tried the solution for your local storage issue that 'gemiller'
> >> suggested in that thread you have opened?
> >> There is no problem enabling local storage. The reason it is not working
> >> with your setup because you not seem to have a Service Offering to use
> >> local storage just default ones which are for shared I guess.
> >>
> >> CS is not a walk in the park from the admin point of view. Especially
> >>for
> >> first timers so if you just started using it I'd highly recommend
> >>spending
> >> time more understanding it at the beginning before trying to do
> >>something
> >> that you think or feel should work because it might not.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Tamas Monos                                               DDI
> >> +44(0)2034687012
> >> Chief Technical                                             Office
> >> +44(0)2034687000
> >> Veber: The Hosting Specialists               Fax         +44(0)871 522
> >> 7057
> >> http://www.veber.co.uk
> >>
> >> Follow us on Twitter: www.twitter.com/veberhost
> >> Follow us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/veberhost
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Alexey Zilber [mailto:alexeyzilber@gmail.com]
> >> Sent: 22 June 2012 13:40
> >> To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> >> Subject: Re: CS 3.0.2 does not report router system vm.
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >>  I'm starting over again with a new setup, taking into account what's
> >> worked (and not) before.  So, things were actually ok with just NFS
> >>storage
> >> and XenServer before.  Then I enabled local storage and added a KVM
> >> cluster.  It completely broke everything, and by broke, I mean CS3 would
> >> spit out blank errors all over the place, could not launch VM's, etc.  I
> >> was pretty frustrated at that point and blew it away.  I've gotten
> >>pretty
> >> good/quick and blowing away and re-installing CS (and all the
> >>hypervisors).
> >>  One such issue I had previously:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> http://cloudstack.org/forum/5-installation/11379-losing-all-hope-primary-
> >>storage-either-local-or-nfs-does-not-work.html
> >> (with a link to a previous issue I had).
> >>
> >> My new(ish) plan right now is this.  I installed ESXi, but reading the
> >>CS
> >> docs regarding it, decided against using it.  I've now re-installed all
> >>my
> >> hypervisors in such a manner that I shouldn't need to rely on local
> >> storage.   Before, I had hacked XenServer to export it's local storage
> >>via
> >> nfs.. that was problematic to say the least.  Here's my latest attempt
> >> which I believe will now work:
> >>
> >> 1. KVM (Centos 6.2) hypervisor with 1TB local disks.  800GB exported as
> >> NFS primary storage back for KVM use.
> >> 2. XenServer 6.02.  Primary on local lan NFS nas.
> >> 3. secondary storage on same NFS nas as a different mount.
> >>
> >> Without enabling local storage, I think this would work, as I now
> >>realize
> >> practically all of my issues came about when I enabled local storage.
> >>  Disabling local storage once enabled is also not possible...
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Alex
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Tamas Monos <tamasm@veber.co.uk>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > I'm using CS 3.0.2 with vSphere 4.1 update1 (paid ESX not ESXi).
> >> > I have a single cluster with two nodes and shared ISCSI storage and
> >> > very happy with it.
> >> > Personally would recommend against local storage as I have noticed
> >> > vmware can be very slow using its local hard drive for VM storage as
> >> > many VM chewing the same disk is painful.
> >> > Also you will not have failover without a shared storage.
> >> > Even if you are tight on budget you could put together an NFS or ISCSI
> >> > server with a 10-15 disk raid.
> >> >
> >> > Could you let us know what do you mean "that really seems to mess it
> >> > up, is enabling local storage. This tends to just make things horribly
> >> > unstable"? Or point me to the bugs you are referring to?
> >> > What is unstable? Do you get exceptions? Can't you deploy VMs?
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> >
> >> > Tamas Monos                                               DDI
> >> > +44(0)2034687012
> >> > Chief Technical                                             Office
> >> > +44(0)2034687000
> >> > Veber: The Hosting Specialists               Fax         +44(0)871 522
> >> > 7057
> >> > http://www.veber.co.uk
> >> >
> >> > Follow us on Twitter: www.twitter.com/veberhost Follow us on
> Facebook:
> >> > www.facebook.com/veberhost
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: Alexey Zilber [mailto:alexeyzilber@gmail.com]
> >> > Sent: 22 June 2012 11:30
> >> > To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> >> > Subject: Re: CS 3.0.2 does not report router system vm.
> >> >
> >> > Hi Tamas,
> >> >
> >> >   I'm probably stuck with 3.0.2 for now since I decided to use vSphere
> >> > 5 (instead of the KVM install I just had).  Many of the issues I've
> >> > had are actually documented bugs, but since the project is somewhat in
> >> limbo I
> >> > don't know how long we have to wait.   I've been installing and
> >> > re-installing in different configs CS 3.0.2 for about a week now, and
> >> > finally got it to a sweet spot where it would run just fine with a
> >> > single hypervisor.
> >> >  One of the things that really seems to mess it up, is enabling local
> >> > storage.   This tends to just make things horribly unstable.   I just
> >> blew
> >> > away my current setup of XenServer+KVM and am going to do another
> >> > attempt (But with XenServer and vSphere) with local storage (since
> >> > both are purported to support local storage).
> >> >  I'm sure 3.0.2 runs just fine once it's setup and it's working, but I
> >> > just find it very disturbing that one small change can throw the whole
> >> > system.  I'd be very worried in using it production.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Alex
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Tamas Monos <tamasm@veber.co.uk>
> >>wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Hi,
> >> > >
> >> > > I think 3.0.2 is not pre-alpha by far. I can easily run a production
> >> > > environment on it with billing integration and customers are happy.
> >> > > Nothing is perfect ever but there is always a workaround. If you
> >> > > could describe what is unusable or blows up we might be able to
> >>help.
> >> > >
> >> > > Regards
> >> > >
> >> > > Tamas Monos                                               DDI
> >> > > +44(0)2034687012
> >> > > Chief Technical                                             Office
> >> > > +44(0)2034687000
> >> > > Veber: The Hosting Specialists               Fax         +44(0)871
> >>522
> >> > > 7057
> >> > > http://www.veber.co.uk
> >> > >
> >> > > Follow us on Twitter: www.twitter.com/veberhost Follow us on
> >>Facebook:
> >> > > www.facebook.com/veberhost
> >> > >
> >> > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > From: Alexey Zilber [mailto:alexeyzilber@gmail.com]
> >> > > Sent: 22 June 2012 02:33
> >> > > To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> >> > > Subject: Re: CS 3.0.2 does not report router system vm.
> >> > >
> >> > > That's a funny place for it to show up, imho.  It's a system vm.
> >> > > I'm pretty sure when I was using the Xen hypervisor it was showing
> >> > > up under system vm's.  Then again, the 3.x branch is so pre-alpha
I
> >> > > don't know where stuff will show up anymore.
> >> > >
> >> > > Any news on when the incubator project is going to be ramped up?
> >> > > 3.0.2 is essentially unusable.  Just adding another hypervisor to
> >> > > the mix causes it to blow up.  I did notice a ton of bug fixes, but
> >> > > those won't show up in any builds till the incubator project is up
> >> > > and running
> >> > I'm guessing.
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > > Alex
> >> > >
> >> > > On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Edison Su <Edison.su@citrix.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> >> > > > > From: Alexey Zilber [mailto:alexeyzilber@gmail.com]
> >> > > > > Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 5:14 PM
> >> > > > > To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
> >> > > > > Subject: CS 3.0.2 does not report router system vm.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Hi All,
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >   This looks like a bug in CS 3.0.2.  I did a clean install.
> >> > > > > Everything is
> >> > > > > on Centos 6.2.  Installed KVM as the first hypervisor in
the
> >> cluster.
> >> > > > >  Launched an instance.  virsh reports:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > [root@kvm1 init.d]# virsh list
> >> > > > >  Id Name                 State
> >> > > > > ----------------------------------
> >> > > > >   1 s-1-VM               running
> >> > > > >   2 v-2-VM               running
> >> > > > >  * 3 r-4-VM               running*
> >> > > > >   4 i-2-3-VM             running
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > #3 above is the system router vm.  It does not show up under
> >> > > > > 'system vm'
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Router VM should not be shown up under "system vm". It should
be
> >> > > > under "zone->network->"
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > under the Zones. (#1 and #2 do).   This is concerning because
> >>when
> >> I
> >> > > > > used
> >> > > > > Xen, it reported it correctly.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Thanks,
> >> > > > > Alex
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
>
>

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