cloudstack-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nitin Mehta <Nitin.Me...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: Deploying using ISOs
Date Thu, 12 Jul 2012 06:22:49 GMT
Fair call Anthony for not having it in the UI.
I think the bigger issue which we all forgot to point in the first place was CS not logging
 that the hosts were discarded for allocation because it lacked hvm capability whereas the
template/iso required it.
I had to read the code to figure that out.

Celeb - may I please request you to file this one as well with the relevant logs you pasted
in this mail thread initially? Thanks

-Nitin

-----Original Message-----
From: Caleb Call [mailto:calebcall@me.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 6:14 PM
To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: Deploying using ISOs

Done, thanks.

http://bugs.cloudstack.org/browse/CS-15551

On Jul 11, 2012, at 6:55 PM, Anthony Xu wrote:

> Please file a bug for this,
>
> Thanks,
> Anthony
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Caleb Call [mailto:calebcall@me.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 5:52 PM
>> To: cloudstack-users@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Deploying using ISOs
>>
>> 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_with
>> ou
>> t_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