Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57F88200BC5 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 12:51:30 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 56982160B1C; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 11:51:30 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 54F86160B0A for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 12:51:29 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 18429 invoked by uid 500); 22 Nov 2016 11:51:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@cloudstack.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@cloudstack.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@cloudstack.apache.org Received: (qmail 18407 invoked by uid 99); 22 Nov 2016 11:51:28 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 11:51:28 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 8159E1A947F; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 11:51:27 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.68 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.68 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd2-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-us.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id f6RxIsggs_bb; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 11:51:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qt0-f195.google.com (mail-qt0-f195.google.com [209.85.216.195]) by mx1-lw-us.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-us.apache.org) with ESMTPS id B78055F283; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 11:51:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qt0-f195.google.com with SMTP id m48so1674701qta.2; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 03:51:22 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=M/vL542oqctojAW9XySkDjdQ9dCu5zXvSyx0Sl+ZfNg=; b=W/YUpHKZWQxUgOINDXzpNtGiZcWGA+8veahRAw241uHGt9H+pIFrNRXsR6QYgF9nmP SJ6CgUrz5q812WKHCRAM3LZHijfjMsWk4BN4bRfqAnUVwwWJzeyKNm/rER4a4sHpVFo7 rM/3oIpTdYsI/gAo4xHB2aoCEdJzD7UYWLSg7SOwciwqXY1OAD7q2c/9KohBmdLOUoC/ FdsbmAWHb1qK6/UsHJsZFOufmHo6YIuyk0uLMkxEDRivCVSsG3OUKfyG8Q1vNDhHWiAE OkBWREtd5cQcIlBS4qimVIoHK2W/h2Z8q2BbTiJH5TK9TUrLEPg3oWLSLrpnbULo073L r8Fg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=M/vL542oqctojAW9XySkDjdQ9dCu5zXvSyx0Sl+ZfNg=; b=k6volA+RKGoBYH7Hf0/KF4/ZTGsfzS9+CNyLVHgpaG15JbVIWNTNPoj26RSi70qJhx X0F0Y4zBVEhY8g/994xeKt+I95OkWuC1UKpMqG7Rn19C90l8+C6MY7sfHIWYo/fMf/1u SagSYtrfLSvYDVWj3xsN8wKKTZo0Of/yrN3KY8gSS6in9GJpeaFhCE0u0kxNyGqtHlTR XtxL3jmitM8mZdsQIX0DQR4pvIlj9js4sMp5PFHeFypkUtkQCd8fYSCB6xmYlMGyRcPr Isb+LaLI2oleIGGPk1eE9sBKJrjAC1cKkCSWuBU31MHyOSyLNrPcVaanGrhGUQ7IXrA7 u3Ew== X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC01s2c7C+kpZbCxQar9aePV/2+UZwA3IlwjP/I2GfUeJy+4QWrUKdPK1FBcK4ywPt4KODy1CFGCOVj21vA== X-Received: by 10.25.190.79 with SMTP id o76mr4213172lff.56.1479815481890; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 03:51:21 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.25.159.196 with HTTP; Tue, 22 Nov 2016 03:51:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <71C3730B-FCA1-438F-BABA-E1A0AEE0A7F5@persistent.co.in> From: anil lakineni Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 14:51:21 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Fault percentage value of CPU usage in Cloud Platform To: "users@cloudstack.apache.org" Cc: dev@cloudstack.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=94eb2c1a1b7e219cb80541e26463 archived-at: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 11:51:30 -0000 --94eb2c1a1b7e219cb80541e26463 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Sudharma, I verified the management server logs when the VPS got failed to deploy and i found that the value of CPU is exceeding than the threshold value So that VPS deployment has been failed. Then i have changed the CPU disable & alert threshold value to above 90% and i was able to deploy the VPS. Please check *http://pastebin.com/irrS0TTg * for the management server log when the VM deployment was failed. *The brief content of the log is-* 2016-11-17 12:46:34,100 DEBUG [c.c.d.DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) DeploymentPlanner allocation algorithm: com.cloud.deploy.FirstFitPlanner@5a32f393 2016-11-17 12:46:34,101 DEBUG [c.c.d.DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Trying to allocate a host and storage pools from dc:1, pod:null,cluster:null, requested cpu: 38400, requested ram: 68719476736 2016-11-17 12:46:34,101 DEBUG [c.c.d.DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Is ROOT volume READY (pool already allocated)?: No 2016-11-17 12:46:34,101 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Searching all possible resources under this Zone: 1 2016-11-17 12:46:34,104 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Listing pods in order of aggregate capacity, that have (atleast one host with) enough CPU and RAM capacity under this Zone: 1 2016-11-17 12:46:34,111 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Removing from the podId list these pods from avoid set: [] 2016-11-17 12:46:34,115 DEBUG [c.c.a.m.AgentManagerImpl] (AgentManager-Handler-14:null) (logid:) SeqA 27-149419: Processing Seq 27-149419: { Cmd , MgmtId: -1, via: 27, Ver: v1, Flags: 11, [{"com.cloud.agent.api.ConsoleProxyLoadReportCommand":{"_proxyVmId":519,"_loadInfo":"{\n \"connections\": []\n}","wait":0}}] } 2016-11-17 12:46:34,124 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Checking resources under Pod: 1 2016-11-17 12:46:34,125 DEBUG [c.c.a.m.AgentManagerImpl] (AgentManager-Handler-14:null) (logid:) SeqA 27-149419: Sending Seq 27-149419: { Ans: , MgmtId: 47019105324719, via: 27, Ver: v1, Flags: 100010, [{"com.cloud.agent.api.AgentControlAnswer":{"result":true,"wait":0}}] } 2016-11-17 12:46:34,126 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Listing clusters in order of aggregate capacity, that have (atleast one host with) enough CPU and RAM capacity under this Pod: 1 2016-11-17 12:46:34,133 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Removing from the clusterId list these clusters from avoid set: [] 2016-11-17 12:46:34,141 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) *Cannot allocate cluster list [5] for vm creation since their allocated percentage crosses the disable capacity threshold defined at each cluster/ at global value for capacity Type : 1, skipping these clusters* 2016-11-17 12:46:34,156 DEBUG [c.c.d.DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Checking resources in Cluster: 1 under Pod: 1 2016-11-17 12:46:34,156 DEBUG [c.c.a.m.a.i.FirstFitAllocator] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf FirstFitRoutingAllocator) (logid:393001e5) Looking for hosts in dc: 1 pod:1 cluster:1 2016-11-17 12:46:34,156 DEBUG [c.c.a.m.a.i.FirstFitAllocator] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf FirstFitRoutingAllocator) (logid:393001e5) Looking for hosts having tag specified on SvcOffering:WinL 2016-11-17 12:46:34,159 DEBUG [c.c.a.m.a.i.FirstFitAllocator] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf FirstFitRoutingAllocator) (logid:393001e5) Hosts with tag 'WinL' are:[] 2016-11-17 12:46:34,163 DEBUG [c.c.a.m.a.i.FirstFitAllocator] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf FirstFitRoutingAllocator) (logid:393001e5) FirstFitAllocator has 0 hosts to check for allocation: [] 2016-11-17 12:46:34,170 DEBUG [c.c.a.m.a.i.FirstFitAllocator] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf FirstFitRoutingAllocator) (logid:393001e5) Found 0 hosts for allocation after prioritization: [] 2016-11-17 12:46:34,170 DEBUG [c.c.a.m.a.i.FirstFitAllocator] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf FirstFitRoutingAllocator) (logid:393001e5) Looking for speed=38400Mhz, Ram=65536 2016-11-17 12:46:34,170 DEBUG [c.c.a.m.a.i.FirstFitAllocator] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf FirstFitRoutingAllocator) (logid:393001e5) Host Allocator returning 0 suitable hosts 2016-11-17 12:46:34,170 DEBUG [c.c.d.DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) No suitable hosts found 2016-11-17 12:46:34,170 DEBUG [c.c.d.DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) No suitable hosts found under this Cluster: 1 2016-11-17 12:46:34,174 DEBUG [c.c.d.DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Could not find suitable Deployment Destination for this VM under any clusters, returning. 2016-11-17 12:46:34,174 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Searching all possible resources under this Zone: 1 2016-11-17 12:46:34,177 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Listing pods in order of aggregate capacity, that have (atleast one host with) enough CPU and RAM capacity under this Zone: 1 2016-11-17 12:46:34,184 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Removing from the podId list these pods from avoid set: [] 2016-11-17 12:46:34,188 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Checking resources under Pod: 1 2016-11-17 12:46:34,189 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Listing clusters in order of aggregate capacity, that have (atleast one host with) enough CPU and RAM capacity under this Pod: 1 2016-11-17 12:46:34,196 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Removing from the clusterId list these clusters from avoid set: [1] 2016-11-17 12:46:34,205 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) *Cannot allocate cluster list [5] for vm creation since their allocated percentage crosses the disable capacity threshold defined at each cluster/ at global value for capacity Type : 1, skipping these clusters* 2016-11-17 12:46:34,205 DEBUG [c.c.d.FirstFitPlanner] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) No clusters found after removing disabled clusters and clusters in avoid list, returning. 2016-11-17 12:46:34,212 DEBUG [c.c.v.UserVmManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) Destroying vm VM[User|i-91-736-VM] as it failed to create on Host with Id:null 2016-11-17 12:46:34,252 DEBUG [c.c.c.CapacityManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-22:ctx-f48bbb10 job-98412 ctx-daf38dbf) (logid:393001e5) 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 Please let me know if you require more information, i will provide you. Best Regards, Anil. On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 12:10 PM, Sudharma Jain wrote: > Hi Anil, > > There could be a bug with the dashboard, but it has nothing to do with the > deployment failure. Check your management server logs. > > Thanks, > Sudharma > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2016 at 1:25 PM, anil lakineni < > anilkumar459.lakineni@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Good Morning, > > > > @Will- but we don't have support contract. > > > > @Bharat- True, but the allocated CPU percentage value is showing wrong in > > the Dashboard where as in Zone's Resources *(Path is: 'Infrastructure' -> > > 'Zones' -> 'click on desired zone name' -> 'Resources') *the percentage > > value is showing correct. > > > > Total CPU allocated is 800 GHz out of 2000 GHz. So that means the > > percentage value should be in 40% range but in my case it is showing 91% > in > > the Dashboard which leads in failing new deployments. But, the same value > > in Zone's Resources is showing accurate 40% value. > > > > > > But, for new VPS or VM deployments the cloud is preferring dashboard > > percentage value not the one which is there at Zone's Resources. So would > > you help me to fix this issue? > > > > > > Best Regards, > > Anil. > > > > On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 7:20 PM, Bharat Kumar < > bharat.kumar@accelerite.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > There may be a difference in what you have allocated and what is being > > > actually used. The dashboard shows what is allocated. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Bharat. > > > > > > On 11/21/16, 9:44 PM, "williamstevens@gmail.com on behalf of Will > > > Stevens" > > > wrote: > > > > > > >You will have to contact Accelerite for support with ACP (previously > > CCP). > > > >We have no visibility into the ACP code or how to support you. > > > > > > > >https://support.accelerite.com/hc/en-us > > > > > > > >Best of luck... > > > > > > > >*Will STEVENS* > > > >Lead Developer > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 3:44 AM, anil lakineni < > > > >anilkumar459.lakineni@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > >> Dear All, > > > >> > > > >> On CloudPlatform dashboard our CPU usage is showing wrong (high > -91%) > > > value > > > >> which in-turn not allowing us to provision new VMs. But, the fact is > > > only > > > >> 40% of the available CPU is utilized and Even in the Dashboard only > > > >> percentage calculation is showing false metric value, But Cpu usage > > > value > > > >> is showing accurate(800/2000 GHZ). > > > >> > > > >> In addition to that when we go to check the CPU status at Zones > level > > we > > > >> are seeing the accurate CPU usage percentage in all Zones, Only we > are > > > >> getting false usage percentage at dashboard level(which leads to > fail > > > the > > > >> new deployments). > > > >> > > > >> - Our CCP version is 4.5.0 > > > >> - Hypervisors are Xen 6.2 & 6.5 > > > >> > > > >> Please help me to sort out this issue and also let me know if any > > > >> additional information needed. > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> Best Regards, > > > >> Anil. > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > DISCLAIMER > > > ========== > > > This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information which > is > > > the property of Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business. It is > intended > > > only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. > If > > > you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to read, > > retain, > > > copy, print, distribute or use this message. If you have received this > > > communication in error, please notify the sender and delete all copies > of > > > this message. Accelerite, a Persistent Systems business does not accept > > any > > > liability for virus infected mails. > > > > > > --94eb2c1a1b7e219cb80541e26463--