OSDir


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

Re: advanced networking with public IPs direct to VMs


That is something, but it does not explain why that same message does not
appear when he is using everything in a single NIC

On Tue, Jun 5, 2018 at 7:08 PM, Andrija Panic <andrija.panic@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> 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
>



-- 
Rafael Weingärtner