cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tamas Monos <tam...@veber.co.uk>
Subject RE: CS 3.0.2 does not report router system vm.
Date Fri, 22 Jun 2012 11:28:48 GMT
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
View raw message