OSDir


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: advanced networking with public IPs direct to VMs


Zone-wide NFS storage ? in this case the SQL returns no results (cluster_id
field in table is NULL)

On 5 June 2018 at 17:16, Jon Marshall <jms.123@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> No problem.
>
>
> I am leaving work now but will test first thing tomorrow and get back to
> you.
>
>
> I definitely have NFS storage as far as I can tell !
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Rafael Weingärtner <rafaelweingartner@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: 05 June 2018 16:13
> To: users
> Subject: Re: advanced networking with public IPs direct to VMs
>
> That is interesting. Let's see the source of all truth...
> This is the code that is generating that odd message.
>
> >     List<StoragePoolVO> clusterPools =
> > _storagePoolDao.listPoolsByCluster(agent.getClusterId());
> >         boolean hasNfs = false;
> >         for (StoragePoolVO pool : clusterPools) {
> >             if (pool.getPoolType() == StoragePoolType.NetworkFilesystem)
> {
> >                 hasNfs = true;
> >                 break;
> >             }
> >         }
> >         if (!hasNfs) {
> >             s_logger.warn(
> >                     "Agent investigation was requested on host " + agent
> +
> > ", but host does not support investigation because it has no NFS storage.
> > Skipping investigation.");
> >             return Status.Disconnected;
> >         }
> >
>
> There are two possibilities here. You do not have any NFS storage? Is that
> the case? Or maybe, for some reason, the call
> "_storagePoolDao.listPoolsByCluster(agent.getClusterId())" is not
> returning
> any NFS storage pools. Looking at the "listPoolsByCluster " we will see
> that the following SQL is used:
>
> Select * from storage_pool where cluster_id = <host'sClusterId> and removed
> > is not null
> >
>
> Can you run that SQL to see the its return when your hosts are marked as
> disconnected?
>
> On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 11:32 AM, Jon Marshall <jms.123@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > I reran the tests with the 3 NIC setup. When I configured the zone
> through
> > the UI I used the labels cloudbr0 for management, cloudbr1 for guest
> > traffic and cloudbr2 for NFS as per my original response to you.
> >
> >
> > When I pull the power to the node (dcp-cscn2.local) after about 5 mins
> > the  host status goes to "Alert" but never to "Down"
> >
> >
> > I get this in the logs -
> >
> >
> > 2018-06-05 15:17:14,382 WARN  [c.c.h.KVMInvestigator]
> > (AgentTaskPool-1:ctx-f4da4dc9) (logid:138e9a93) Agent investigation was
> > requested on host Host[-4-Routing], but host does not support
> investigation
> > because it has no NFS storage. Skipping investigation.
> > 2018-06-05 15:17:14,382 DEBUG [c.c.h.HighAvailabilityManagerImpl]
> > (AgentTaskPool-1:ctx-f4da4dc9) (logid:138e9a93) KVMInvestigator was able
> to
> > determine host 4 is in Disconnected
> > 2018-06-05 15:17:14,382 INFO  [c.c.a.m.AgentManagerImpl]
> > (AgentTaskPool-1:ctx-f4da4dc9) (logid:138e9a93) The agent from host 4
> state
> > determined is Disconnected
> > 2018-06-05 15:17:14,382 WARN  [c.c.a.m.AgentManagerImpl]
> > (AgentTaskPool-1:ctx-f4da4dc9) (logid:138e9a93) Agent is disconnected but
> > the host is still up: 4-dcp-cscn2.local
> >
> > I don't understand why it thinks there is no NFS storage as each compute
> > node has a dedicated storage NIC.
> >
> >
> > I also don't understand why it thinks the host is still up ie. what test
> > is it doing to determine that ?
> >
> >
> > Am I just trying to get something working that is not supported ?
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Rafael Weingärtner <rafaelweingartner@xxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: 04 June 2018 15:31
> > To: users
> > Subject: Re: advanced networking with public IPs direct to VMs
> >
> > What type of failover are you talking about?
> > What ACS version are you using?
> > What hypervisor are you using?
> > How are you configuring your NICs in the hypervisor?
> > How are you configuring the traffic labels in ACS?
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 4, 2018 at 11:29 AM, Jon Marshall <jms.123@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi all
> > >
> > >
> > > I am close to giving up on basic networking as I just cannot get
> failover
> > > working with multiple NICs (I am not even sure it is supported).
> > >
> > >
> > > What I would like is to use 3 NICs for management, storage and guest
> > > traffic. I would like to assign public IPs direct to the VMs which is
> > why I
> > > originally chose basic.
> > >
> > >
> > > If I switch to advanced networking do I just configure a guest VM with
> > > public IPs on one NIC and not both with the public traffic -
> > >
> > >
> > > would this work ?
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Rafael Weingärtner
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Rafael Weingärtner
>



-- 

Andrija Panić