cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Caleb Call <calebc...@me.com>
Subject Re: Deploying using ISOs
Date Thu, 12 Jul 2012 00:52:16 GMT
I think the global option would be best (easiest for majority of users).  Also, the documentation
for disabling HVM in the db (http://docs.cloudstack.org/Knowledge_Base/How_to_use_CloudStack_without_Hardware_Virtualization)
should be updated as well to atleast mention the need to update templates in the db as well
if running without HVM support.


On Jul 11, 2012, at 6:39 PM, Anthony Xu wrote:

> We removed HVM from UI intentionally due to following reasons,
> 1. most users may not know what's HVM, it is confusing.
> 2. for vmware, it doesn't care about HVM, it can boot any OS on any x86_64 host.
> 3. for kvm, HVM support is required. 
> So it is hard for user to configure hvm for template/iso.
> And 
> 4. most of hosts support HVM.
> 
> 
> Only XenServer cares about HVM, and even for XenServer , HVM is OS specific, for example,
XenServer only supports PV linux, no HVM linux.
> Luckily, XenServer will complain if you want to start a HVM on a non-HVM host.
> 
> 
> So I think we can add a global configuration to enable/disable all HVM checks in CloudStack
> 
> 
> Anthony
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Nitin Mehta [mailto:Nitin.Mehta@citrix.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 5:07 PM
>> To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: RE: Deploying using ISOs
>> 
>> Celeb - could you please open a UI bug for this @
>> http://bugs.cloudstack.org/secure/Dashboard.jspa ? The UI should have
>> an option to mark/unmark the template/iso hvm while registering it. The
>> api already provides that.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -Nitin
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Caleb Call [mailto:calebcall@me.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 11:37 AM
>> To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Deploying using ISOs
>> 
>> Great, thanks, that's exactly what it was.  VM started fine this time.
>> 
>> On Jul 11, 2012, at 12:29 PM, Edison Su wrote:
>> 
>>> Yah, that's the problem. All the templates/ISOs uploaded through UI,
>> are marked as HVM enabled by default, while your hypervisor doesn't
>> support HVM, then you can't create VM.
>>> You can hack the DB, by "update vm_template set hvm=0", then try to
>> create the VM again. But you need to make sure, your ISO does support
>> PV.
>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Caleb Call [mailto:calebcall@me.com]
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 11:18 AM
>>>> To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: Deploying using ISOs
>>>> 
>>>> Guest OS is CentOS, I've tried setting it to CentOS 6 (what it is),
>>>> CentOS 5.6, and CentOS 5.3 (what the CentOS 5.6 template uses) and
>> it
>>>> still does not work.  My hypervisor is Xenserver 6 without HVM
>>>> support (test environment, using older hardware).
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Jul 11, 2012, at 12:13 PM, Edison Su wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> What's the guest os type of your ISO? How about change the guest OS
>>>> type to CentOS 5.6 also? Will it work?
>>>>> And what's your hypervisor? Does your hypervisor host support HVM?
>>>>> 
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Caleb Call [mailto:calebcall@me.com]
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 2:28 AM
>>>>>> To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
>>>>>> Subject: Deploying using ISOs
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm trying to create VMs using ISOs I've uploaded.  The ISOs all
>>>>>> say they are ready to be used and they show up fine during
>> instance
>>>>>> creation.  However, once I create the instance, I get an error
>> that
>>>>>> says "Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|<vm id>]".
>> Looking
>>>>>> through the logs, it seems like the way it's determining resources
>>>> is
>>>>>> different for ISO based and Template based.  I can create a VM
>>>>>> using the included CentOS 5.6 template with the exact same compute
>>>> offering.
>>>>>> In the logs I get this when creating a VM from a template:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -------------
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,893 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) DeploymentPlanner allocation algorithm:
>> firstfit
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,893 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) Trying to allocate a host and storage pools
>> from
>>>>>> dc:2, pod:null,cluster:null, requested cpu: 500, requested ram:
>>>>>> 536870912
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,893 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) Is ROOT volume READY (pool already allocated)?:
>>>> No
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,893 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) Searching all possible resources under this
>> Zone:
>>>> 2
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,898 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) Listing clusters in order of aggregate capacity,
>>>>>> that have (atleast one host with) enough CPU and RAM capacity
>> under
>>>>>> this Zone: 2
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,900 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) CPUOverprovisioningFactor considered: 3.0
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,921 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) Checking resources in Cluster: 3 under Pod: 2
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,922 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51) Calling HostAllocators to find suitable hosts
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,922 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator]
>>>> (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Looking for hosts in
>> dc:
>>>> 2
>>>>>> pod:2  cluster:3
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,928 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator]
>>>> (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) FirstFitAllocator has
>> 2
>>>>>> hosts to check for allocation: [Host[-1-Routing], Host[-5-Routing]]
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,949 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator]
>>>> (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Found 2 hosts for
>>>>>> allocation after prioritization: [Host[-5-Routing],
>>>>>> Host[-1-Routing]]
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,949 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator]
>>>> (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Looking for
>>>>>> speed=500Mhz,
>>>>>> Ram=512
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,972 DEBUG [cloud.capacity.CapacityManagerImpl]
>>>>>> (Job-Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Checking if host:
>>>>>> 5 has enough capacity for requested CPU: 500 and requested RAM:
>>>>>> 536870912 , cpuOverprovisioningFactor
>>>>>> : 3.0
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,986 DEBUG [cloud.capacity.CapacityManagerImpl]
>>>>>> (Job-Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Hosts's actual
>>>> total
>>>>>> CPU: 11172 and CPU after applying overprovisioning: 33516
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,986 DEBUG [cloud.capacity.CapacityManagerImpl]
>>>>>> (Job-Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Free CPU: 30516
,
>>>>>> Requested CPU: 500
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,994 DEBUG [cloud.capacity.CapacityManagerImpl]
>>>>>> (Job-Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Free RAM:
>>>> 4830291968 ,
>>>>>> Requested RAM: 536870912
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:08:36,994 DEBUG [cloud.capacity.CapacityManagerImpl]
>>>>>> (Job-Executor-1:job-51 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Host has enough
>>>>>> CPU and RAM available
>>>>>> -------------
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> However, using the exact same compute offering, when I try to
>>>>>> create
>>>> a
>>>>>> VM using an ISO, I get the following in the logs:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -------------
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,534 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) DeploymentPlanner allocation algorithm:
>> firstfit
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,535 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) Trying to allocate a host and storage pools
>> from
>>>>>> dc:2, pod:null,cluster:null, requested cpu: 500, requested ram:
>>>>>> 536870912
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,535 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) Is ROOT volume READY (pool already allocated)?:
>>>> No
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,535 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) Searching all possible resources under this
>> Zone:
>>>> 2
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,539 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) Listing clusters in order of aggregate capacity,
>>>>>> that have (atleast one host with) enough CPU and RAM capacity
>> under
>>>>>> this Zone: 2
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,541 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) CPUOverprovisioningFactor considered: 3.0
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,558 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) Checking resources in Cluster: 3 under Pod: 2
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,558 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) Calling HostAllocators to find suitable hosts
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,558 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator]
>>>> (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Looking for hosts in
>> dc:
>>>> 2
>>>>>> pod:2  cluster:3
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,564 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator]
>>>> (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) FirstFitAllocator has
>> 2
>>>>>> hosts to check for allocation: [Host[-1-Routing], Host[-5-Routing]]
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,567 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator]
>>>> (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Found 0 hosts for
>>>>>> allocation after prioritization: []
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,568 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator]
>>>> (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Looking for
>>>>>> speed=500Mhz,
>>>>>> Ram=512
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,568 DEBUG [allocator.impl.FirstFitAllocator]
>>>> (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) Host Allocator
>>>>>> returning
>>>> 0
>>>>>> suitable hosts
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,568 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) No suitable hosts found
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,568 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) No suitable hosts found under this Cluster: 3
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,568 DEBUG [cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner] (Job-
>>>>>> Executor-2:job-52) Could not find suitable Deployment Destination
>>>> for
>>>>>> this VM under any clusters, returning.
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,654 DEBUG [cloud.capacity.CapacityManagerImpl]
>>>>>> (Job-Executor-2:job-52) VM state transitted from :Starting to
>>>> Stopped
>>>>>> with event: OperationFailedvm's original host id: null new host id:
>>>>>> null host id before state tran
>>>>>> sition: null
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,754 DEBUG [cloud.capacity.CapacityManagerImpl]
>>>>>> (Job-Executor-2:job-52) VM state transitted from :Stopped to Error
>>>> with
>>>>>> event: OperationFailedToErrorvm's original host id: null new host
>> id:
>>>>>> null host id before state
>>>>>> transition: null
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,800 DEBUG [agent.manager.AgentManagerImpl]
>>>>>> (AgentManager-Handler-15:null) SeqA 3-187783: Processing Seq 3-
>>>> 187783:
>>>>>> { Cmd , MgmtId: -1, via: 3, Ver: v1, Flags: 11,
>>>>>> [{"ConsoleProxyLoadReportCommand":{"_proxyVmId":2,"_
>>>>>> loadInfo":"{\n  \"connections\": [\n    {\n      \"id\": 524,\n
>>>>>> \"clientInfo\": \"\",\n      \"host\": \"10.1.11.3\",\n
>>>> \"port\":
>>>>>> 5906,\n      \"tag\": \"\",\n      \"createTime\":
>> 1341997999371,\n
>>>>>> \"lastUsedTime\": 1341
>>>>>> 997999371\n    },\n    {\n      \"id\": 8,\n      \"clientInfo\":
>>>>>> \"\",\n      \"host\": \"10.1.11.4\",\n      \"port\": 5902,\n
>>>>>> \"tag\": \"c43d83ff-35e0-4eb6-87b4-d56f7a2929f9\",\n
>>>>>> \"createTime\": 1341904048748,\n      \"las
>>>>>> tUsedTime\": 1341998035188\n    }\n  ]\n}","wait":0}}] }
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:58,857 DEBUG [agent.manager.AgentManagerImpl]
>>>>>> (AgentManager-Handler-15:null) SeqA 3-187783: Sending Seq 3-187783:
>>>>>> { Ans: , MgmtId: 74142025330, via: 3, Ver: v1, Flags: 100010,
>>>>>> [{"AgentControlAnswer":{"result":true,"wa
>>>>>> it":0}}] }
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:59,133 INFO  [api.commands.DeployVMCmd] (Job-
>>>> Executor-
>>>>>> 2:job-52) com.cloud.exception.InsufficientServerCapacityException:
>>>>>> Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-2-18-
>> VM]Scope=interface
>>>>>> com.cloud.dc.DataCenter; id=2
>>>>>> 2012-07-11 03:13:59,134 WARN  [cloud.api.ApiDispatcher] (Job-
>>>> Executor-
>>>>>> 2:job-52) class com.cloud.api.ServerApiException : Unable to
>> create
>>>> a
>>>>>> deployment for VM[User|i-2-18-VM]
>>>>>> -------------
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> So after looking for the exact same thing "Looking for
>>>>>> speed=500Mhz, Ram=512" in both cases, the template passes (or
>>>>>> atleast proceeds to
>>>> do
>>>>>> further checks, and eventually passing) and the ISO immediately
>>>> fails.
>>>>>> Is there something I'm doing wrong?  Is this a bug that needs to
>> be
>>>>>> patched or looked in to?  Or, is there another way to create a
>>>> template
>>>>>> other than deploying with an ISO and creating a template off that
>>>>>> deployment?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Environment info:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Cloudstack 3.0.2
>>>>>> ISO Tried - CentOS 6.2 minimal (both x86 and x64), Ubuntu Server
>>>> 12.04,
>>>>>> CentOS 5.8 Netinstall
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Caleb
>>>>> 
>>> 
> 


Mime
View raw message