7:21 a.m.
So... It is possible for a fully automatic migration of the VM to another
hypervisor in case Storage connection fails?
How can we make this happen? Because for the moment, when we tested the
situation they stayed in pause state.
(Test situation:
- Unplug the 2 fibre cables from the hypervisor
- VM's go in pause state
- VM's stayed in pause state until the failure was solved
)
They only returned when we restored the fiber connection to the
Hypervisor...
Kind Regards,
Koen
2014-04-04 13:52 GMT+02:00 Koen Vanoppen <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>:
So... It is possible for a fully automatic migration of the VM to
another
hypervisor in case Storage connection fails?
How can we make this happen? Because for the moment, when we tested the
situation they stayed in pause state.
(Test situation:
- Unplug the 2 fibre cables from the hypervisor
- VM's go in pause state
- VM's stayed in pause state until the failure was solved
)
They only returned when we restored the fiber connection to the
Hypervisor...
Kind Regards,
Koen
2014-04-03 16:53 GMT+02:00 Koen Vanoppen <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Doron Fediuck" <dfediuck(a)redhat.com>
> Date: Apr 3, 2014 4:51 PM
> Subject: Re: [Users] HA
> To: "Koen Vanoppen" <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>
> Cc: "Omer Frenkel" <ofrenkel(a)redhat.com>, <users(a)ovirt.org>,
"Federico
> Simoncelli" <fsimonce(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
<amureini(a)redhat.com>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Koen Vanoppen" <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>
> > To: "Omer Frenkel" <ofrenkel(a)redhat.com>, users(a)ovirt.org
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 4:17:36 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Users] HA
> >
> > Yes, indeed. I meant not-operational. Sorry.
> > So, if I understand this correctly. When we ever come in a situation
> that we
> > loose both storage connections on our hypervisor, we will have to
> manually
> > restore the connections first?
> >
> > And thanx for the tip for speeding up thins :-).
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Koen
> >
> >
> > 2014-04-02 15:14 GMT+02:00 Omer Frenkel < ofrenkel(a)redhat.com > :
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Koen Vanoppen" < vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com >
> > > To: users(a)ovirt.org
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 4:07:19 PM
> > > Subject: [Users] HA
> > >
> > > Dear All,
> > >
> > > Due our acceptance testing, we discovered something. (Document will
> > > follow).
> > > When we disable one fiber path, no problem multipath finds it way no
> pings
> > > are lost.
> > > BUT when we disabled both the fiber paths (so one of the storage
> domain is
> > > gone on this host, but still available on the other host), vms go in
> paused
> > > mode... He chooses a new SPM (can we speed this up?), put's the host
> in
> > > non-responsive (can we speed this up, more important) and the VM's
> stay on
> > > Paused mode... I would expect that they would be migrated (yes, HA is
> >
> > i guess you mean the host moves to not-operational (in contrast to
> > non-responsive)?
> > if so, the engine will not migrate vms that are paused to do io error,
> > because of data corruption risk.
> >
> > to speed up you can look at the storage domain monitoring timeout:
> > engine-config --get StorageDomainFalureTimeoutInMinutes
> >
> >
> > > enabled) to the other host and reboot there... Any solution? We are
> still
> > > using oVirt 3.3.1 , but we are planning a upgrade to 3.4 after the
> easter
> > > holiday.
> > >
> > > Kind Regards,
> > >
> > > Koen
> > >
>
> Hi Koen,
> Resuming from paused due to io issues is supported (adding relevant
> folks).
> Regardless, if you did not define power management, you should manually
> approve
> source host was rebooted in order for migration to proceed. Otherwise we
> risk
> split-brain scenario.
>
> Doron
>
7:27 a.m.
New subject: [Users] HA
On 04/04/2014 03:21 PM, Koen Vanoppen wrote:
So... It is possible for a fully automatic migration of the VM to
another hypervisor in case Storage connection fails?
How can we make this happen? Because for the moment, when we tested the
situation they stayed in pause state.
(Test situation:
* Unplug the 2 fibre cables from the hypervisor
* VM's go in pause state
* VM's stayed in pause state until the failure was solved
)
the KVM team advised this would be an unsafe migration. iirc, since IO
can be stuck at kernel level, pending write to the storage, which would
cause corruption if storage is recovered while the VM is now running on
another machine.
They only returned when we restored the fiber connection to the
Hypervisor...
Kind Regards,
Koen
2014-04-04 13:52 GMT+02:00 Koen Vanoppen <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com
<mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com>>:
So... It is possible for a fully automatic migration of the VM to
another hypervisor in case Storage connection fails?
How can we make this happen? Because for the moment, when we tested
the situation they stayed in pause state.
(Test situation:
* Unplug the 2 fibre cables from the hypervisor
* VM's go in pause state
* VM's stayed in pause state until the failure was solved
)
They only returned when we restored the fiber connection to the
Hypervisor...
Kind Regards,
Koen
2014-04-03 16:53 GMT+02:00 Koen Vanoppen <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com
<mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com>>:
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Doron Fediuck" <dfediuck(a)redhat.com
<mailto:dfediuck@redhat.com>>
Date: Apr 3, 2014 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Users] HA
To: "Koen Vanoppen" <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com
<mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com>>
Cc: "Omer Frenkel" <ofrenkel(a)redhat.com
<mailto:ofrenkel@redhat.com>>, <users(a)ovirt.org
<mailto:users@ovirt.org>>, "Federico Simoncelli"
<fsimonce(a)redhat.com <mailto:fsimonce@redhat.com>>, "Allon
Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com <mailto:amureini@redhat.com>>
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Koen Vanoppen" <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com
<mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com>>
> To: "Omer Frenkel" <ofrenkel(a)redhat.com
<mailto:ofrenkel@redhat.com>>, users(a)ovirt.org
<mailto:users@ovirt.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 4:17:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [Users] HA
>
> Yes, indeed. I meant not-operational. Sorry.
> So, if I understand this correctly. When we ever come in a
situation that we
> loose both storage connections on our hypervisor, we will
have to manually
> restore the connections first?
>
> And thanx for the tip for speeding up thins :-).
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Koen
>
>
> 2014-04-02 15:14 GMT+02:00 Omer Frenkel < ofrenkel(a)redhat.com
<mailto:ofrenkel@redhat.com> > :
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Koen Vanoppen" < vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com
<mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com> >
> > To: users(a)ovirt.org <mailto:users@ovirt.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 4:07:19 PM
> > Subject: [Users] HA
> >
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Due our acceptance testing, we discovered something.
(Document will
> > follow).
> > When we disable one fiber path, no problem multipath finds
it way no pings
> > are lost.
> > BUT when we disabled both the fiber paths (so one of the
storage domain is
> > gone on this host, but still available on the other host),
vms go in paused
> > mode... He chooses a new SPM (can we speed this up?), put's
the host in
> > non-responsive (can we speed this up, more important) and
the VM's stay on
> > Paused mode... I would expect that they would be migrated
(yes, HA is
>
> i guess you mean the host moves to not-operational (in
contrast to
> non-responsive)?
> if so, the engine will not migrate vms that are paused to do
io error,
> because of data corruption risk.
>
> to speed up you can look at the storage domain monitoring
timeout:
> engine-config --get StorageDomainFalureTimeoutInMinutes
>
>
> > enabled) to the other host and reboot there... Any
solution? We are still
> > using oVirt 3.3.1 , but we are planning a upgrade to 3.4
after the easter
> > holiday.
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> >
> > Koen
> >
Hi Koen,
Resuming from paused due to io issues is supported (adding
relevant folks).
Regardless, if you did not define power management, you should
manually approve
source host was rebooted in order for migration to proceed.
Otherwise we risk
split-brain scenario.
Doron
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
8:14 a.m.
New subject: [Users] HA
Do you have power management configured?
Was the "failed" host fenced/rebooted?
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Koen Vanoppen <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>wrote:
So... It is possible for a fully automatic migration of the VM to
another
hypervisor in case Storage connection fails?
How can we make this happen? Because for the moment, when we tested the
situation they stayed in pause state.
(Test situation:
- Unplug the 2 fibre cables from the hypervisor
- VM's go in pause state
- VM's stayed in pause state until the failure was solved
)
They only returned when we restored the fiber connection to the
Hypervisor...
Kind Regards,
Koen
2014-04-04 13:52 GMT+02:00 Koen Vanoppen <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>:
> So... It is possible for a fully automatic migration of the VM to another
> hypervisor in case Storage connection fails?
> How can we make this happen? Because for the moment, when we tested the
> situation they stayed in pause state.
> (Test situation:
>
> - Unplug the 2 fibre cables from the hypervisor
> - VM's go in pause state
> - VM's stayed in pause state until the failure was solved
>
> )
>
>
> They only returned when we restored the fiber connection to the
> Hypervisor...
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Koen
>
>
> 2014-04-03 16:53 GMT+02:00 Koen Vanoppen <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>:
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: "Doron Fediuck" <dfediuck(a)redhat.com>
>> Date: Apr 3, 2014 4:51 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Users] HA
>> To: "Koen Vanoppen" <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>
>> Cc: "Omer Frenkel" <ofrenkel(a)redhat.com>,
<users(a)ovirt.org>, "Federico
>> Simoncelli" <fsimonce(a)redhat.com>, "Allon Mureinik"
<amureini(a)redhat.com
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Koen Vanoppen" <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>
>> > To: "Omer Frenkel" <ofrenkel(a)redhat.com>, users(a)ovirt.org
>> > Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 4:17:36 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [Users] HA
>> >
>> > Yes, indeed. I meant not-operational. Sorry.
>> > So, if I understand this correctly. When we ever come in a situation
>> that we
>> > loose both storage connections on our hypervisor, we will have to
>> manually
>> > restore the connections first?
>> >
>> > And thanx for the tip for speeding up thins :-).
>> >
>> > Kind regards,
>> >
>> > Koen
>> >
>> >
>> > 2014-04-02 15:14 GMT+02:00 Omer Frenkel < ofrenkel(a)redhat.com > :
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > From: "Koen Vanoppen" < vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com >
>> > > To: users(a)ovirt.org
>> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 4:07:19 PM
>> > > Subject: [Users] HA
>> > >
>> > > Dear All,
>> > >
>> > > Due our acceptance testing, we discovered something. (Document will
>> > > follow).
>> > > When we disable one fiber path, no problem multipath finds it way no
>> pings
>> > > are lost.
>> > > BUT when we disabled both the fiber paths (so one of the storage
>> domain is
>> > > gone on this host, but still available on the other host), vms go in
>> paused
>> > > mode... He chooses a new SPM (can we speed this up?), put's the
host
>> in
>> > > non-responsive (can we speed this up, more important) and the VM's
>> stay on
>> > > Paused mode... I would expect that they would be migrated (yes, HA is
>> >
>> > i guess you mean the host moves to not-operational (in contrast to
>> > non-responsive)?
>> > if so, the engine will not migrate vms that are paused to do io error,
>> > because of data corruption risk.
>> >
>> > to speed up you can look at the storage domain monitoring timeout:
>> > engine-config --get StorageDomainFalureTimeoutInMinutes
>> >
>> >
>> > > enabled) to the other host and reboot there... Any solution? We are
>> still
>> > > using oVirt 3.3.1 , but we are planning a upgrade to 3.4 after the
>> easter
>> > > holiday.
>> > >
>> > > Kind Regards,
>> > >
>> > > Koen
>> > >
>>
>> Hi Koen,
>> Resuming from paused due to io issues is supported (adding relevant
>> folks).
>> Regardless, if you did not define power management, you should manually
>> approve
>> source host was rebooted in order for migration to proceed. Otherwise we
>> risk
>> split-brain scenario.
>>
>> Doron
>>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
8:35 a.m.
New subject: [Users] HA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Itamar Heim" <iheim(a)redhat.com>
To: "Koen Vanoppen" <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>, "Doron Fediuck"
<dfediuck(a)redhat.com>, users(a)ovirt.org
Sent: Friday, April 4, 2014 3:27:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Users] HA
On 04/04/2014 03:21 PM, Koen Vanoppen wrote:
> So... It is possible for a fully automatic migration of the VM to
> another hypervisor in case Storage connection fails?
> How can we make this happen? Because for the moment, when we tested the
> situation they stayed in pause state.
> (Test situation:
>
> * Unplug the 2 fibre cables from the hypervisor
> * VM's go in pause state
> * VM's stayed in pause state until the failure was solved
>
> )
the KVM team advised this would be an unsafe migration. iirc, since IO
can be stuck at kernel level, pending write to the storage, which would
cause corruption if storage is recovered while the VM is now running on
another machine.
correct,
Migration while the VM was paused due to EIO id deemed as unsafe and might lead to data
corruption,
There is a feature that automatically resumes the VM ones storage connectivity was
regained.
In addition you can manually fence the host (if you have fencing device configured) and
than run the VM somewhere else (or you can define the vm as Highly available and the
engine will run it again for you).
Anyway just to be on the safe side, I saw earlier in the thread a comment about "host
has been rebooted",
Do not use it unless you actually reboot the host.
>
>
> They only returned when we restored the fiber connection to the
> Hypervisor...
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Koen
>
>
>
> 2014-04-04 13:52 GMT+02:00 Koen Vanoppen <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com
> <mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com>>:
>
> So... It is possible for a fully automatic migration of the VM to
> another hypervisor in case Storage connection fails?
> How can we make this happen? Because for the moment, when we tested
> the situation they stayed in pause state.
> (Test situation:
>
> * Unplug the 2 fibre cables from the hypervisor
> * VM's go in pause state
> * VM's stayed in pause state until the failure was solved
>
> )
>
>
> They only returned when we restored the fiber connection to the
> Hypervisor...
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Koen
>
>
> 2014-04-03 16:53 GMT+02:00 Koen Vanoppen <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com
> <mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com>>:
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Doron Fediuck" <dfediuck(a)redhat.com
> <mailto:dfediuck@redhat.com>>
> Date: Apr 3, 2014 4:51 PM
> Subject: Re: [Users] HA
> To: "Koen Vanoppen" <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com
> <mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com>>
> Cc: "Omer Frenkel" <ofrenkel(a)redhat.com
> <mailto:ofrenkel@redhat.com>>, <users(a)ovirt.org
> <mailto:users@ovirt.org>>, "Federico Simoncelli"
> <fsimonce(a)redhat.com <mailto:fsimonce@redhat.com>>, "Allon
> Mureinik" <amureini(a)redhat.com
<mailto:amureini@redhat.com>>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Koen Vanoppen" <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com
> <mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com>>
> > To: "Omer Frenkel" <ofrenkel(a)redhat.com
> <mailto:ofrenkel@redhat.com>>, users(a)ovirt.org
> <mailto:users@ovirt.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 4:17:36 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Users] HA
> >
> > Yes, indeed. I meant not-operational. Sorry.
> > So, if I understand this correctly. When we ever come in a
> situation that we
> > loose both storage connections on our hypervisor, we will
> have to manually
> > restore the connections first?
> >
> > And thanx for the tip for speeding up thins :-).
> >
> > Kind regards,
> >
> > Koen
> >
> >
> > 2014-04-02 15:14 GMT+02:00 Omer Frenkel < ofrenkel(a)redhat.com
> <mailto:ofrenkel@redhat.com> > :
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Koen Vanoppen" < vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com
> <mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com> >
> > > To: users(a)ovirt.org <mailto:users@ovirt.org>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 4:07:19 PM
> > > Subject: [Users] HA
> > >
> > > Dear All,
> > >
> > > Due our acceptance testing, we discovered something.
> (Document will
> > > follow).
> > > When we disable one fiber path, no problem multipath finds
> it way no pings
> > > are lost.
> > > BUT when we disabled both the fiber paths (so one of the
> storage domain is
> > > gone on this host, but still available on the other host),
> vms go in paused
> > > mode... He chooses a new SPM (can we speed this up?), put's
> the host in
> > > non-responsive (can we speed this up, more important) and
> the VM's stay on
> > > Paused mode... I would expect that they would be migrated
> (yes, HA is
> >
> > i guess you mean the host moves to not-operational (in
> contrast to
> > non-responsive)?
> > if so, the engine will not migrate vms that are paused to do
> io error,
> > because of data corruption risk.
> >
> > to speed up you can look at the storage domain monitoring
> timeout:
> > engine-config --get StorageDomainFalureTimeoutInMinutes
> >
> >
> > > enabled) to the other host and reboot there... Any
> solution? We are still
> > > using oVirt 3.3.1 , but we are planning a upgrade to 3.4
> after the easter
> > > holiday.
> > >
> > > Kind Regards,
> > >
> > > Koen
> > >
>
> Hi Koen,
> Resuming from paused due to io issues is supported (adding
> relevant folks).
> Regardless, if you did not define power management, you should
> manually approve
> source host was rebooted in order for migration to proceed.
> Otherwise we risk
> split-brain scenario.
>
> Doron
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users(a)ovirt.org
> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
8:39 a.m.
New subject: [Users] HA
--Apple-Mail=_288231F1-4E67-445C-BD5C-619AAD0235E3
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=windows-1252
On 4 Apr 2014, at 15:14, Sander Grendelman wrote:
Do you have power management configured?
Was the "failed" host fenced/rebooted?
=20
=20
On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Koen Vanoppen =
<vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
So... It is possible for a fully automatic migration of the VM to =
another hypervisor in case Storage connection fails?
How can we make this happen? Because for the moment, when we tested =
the situation they stayed in pause state.
(Test situation:
Unplug the 2 fibre cables from the hypervisor
VM's go in pause state
VM's stayed in pause state until the failure was solved
as said before, it's not safe hence we (try to) not migrate them.
They only get paused when they actually access the storage which may not =
be always the case. I.e. the storage connection is severed, host deemed =
NonOperational and VMs are getting migrated from it, then some of them =
will succeed if they didn't access that "bad" storage =85 the paused VMs =
will remain (mostly, it can still happen that they appear paused =
migrated on other host when the disk access occurs only at the last =
stage of migration)
so in other words, if you want to migrate the VMs without interruption =
it's not sometimes possible
if you are fine with the VMs restarted in short time on other host then =
power management/fencing will help here
Thanks,
michal
)
=20
=20
=20
They only returned when we restored the fiber connection to the =
Hypervisor=85
yes, since 3.3 we have the autoresume feature
Thanks,
michal
>=20
> Kind Regards,
>=20
> Koen
>=20
>=20
>=20
> 2014-04-04 13:52 GMT+02:00 Koen Vanoppen <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>:
So... It is possible for a fully automatic migration of the VM to =
another hypervisor in case Storage connection fails?
How can we make this happen? Because for the moment, when we tested =
the situation they stayed in pause state.
(Test situation:
Unplug the 2 fibre cables from the hypervisor
VM's go in pause state
VM's stayed in pause state until the failure was solved
)
=20
=20
=20
They only returned when we restored the fiber connection to the =
Hypervisor...
=20
Kind Regards,
=20
Koen
=20
=20
2014-04-03 16:53 GMT+02:00 Koen Vanoppen <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>:
=20
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Doron Fediuck" <dfediuck(a)redhat.com>
Date: Apr 3, 2014 4:51 PM
Subject: Re: [Users] HA
To: "Koen Vanoppen" <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>
Cc: "Omer Frenkel" <ofrenkel(a)redhat.com>, <users(a)ovirt.org>,
"Federico =
Simoncelli" <fsimonce(a)redhat.com>, "Allon
Mureinik" =
<amureini(a)redhat.com>
=20
=20
=20
----- Original Message -----
> From: "Koen Vanoppen" <vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com>
> To: "Omer Frenkel" <ofrenkel(a)redhat.com>, users(a)ovirt.org
> Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 4:17:36 PM
> Subject: Re: [Users] HA
>
> Yes, indeed. I meant not-operational. Sorry.
> So, if I understand this correctly. When we ever come in a situation =
that
we
> loose both storage connections on our hypervisor, we will have
to =
manually
> restore the connections first?
>
> And thanx for the tip for speeding up thins :-).
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Koen
>
>
> 2014-04-02 15:14 GMT+02:00 Omer Frenkel < ofrenkel(a)redhat.com > :
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Koen Vanoppen" < vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com >
> > To: users(a)ovirt.org
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 4:07:19 PM
> > Subject: [Users] HA
> >
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Due our acceptance testing, we discovered something. (Document =
will
> > follow).
> > When we disable one fiber path, no problem multipath finds it way =
no
pings
> > are lost.
> > BUT when we disabled both the fiber paths (so one of the storage =
domain
is
> > gone on this host, but still available on the other host),
vms go =
in paused
> > mode... He chooses a new SPM (can we speed this up?),
put's the =
host in
> > non-responsive (can we speed this up, more important) and
the VM's =
stay on
> > Paused mode... I would expect that they would be migrated
(yes, HA =
is
>
> i guess you mean the host moves to not-operational (in contrast to
> non-responsive)?
> if so, the engine will not migrate vms that are paused to do io =
error,
> because of data corruption risk.
>
> to speed up you can look at the storage domain monitoring timeout:
> engine-config --get StorageDomainFalureTimeoutInMinutes
>
>
> > enabled) to the other host and reboot there... Any solution? We =
are
still
> > using oVirt 3.3.1 , but we are planning a upgrade to 3.4
after the =
easter
> > holiday.
> >
> > Kind Regards,
> >
> > Koen
> >
=20
Hi Koen,
Resuming from paused due to io issues is supported (adding relevant =
folks).
Regardless, if you did not define power management, you should =
manually approve
source host was rebooted in order for migration to proceed. Otherwise
=
we risk
split-brain scenario.
=20
Doron
=20
=20
=20
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
=20
=20
_______________________________________________
Users mailing list
Users(a)ovirt.org
http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
--Apple-Mail=_288231F1-4E67-445C-BD5C-619AAD0235E3
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
charset=windows-1252
<html><head></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; =
"><br><div><div>On 4 Apr 2014, at 15:14, Sander Grendelman =
wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote
=
type=3D"cite"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>Do you have power
management =
configured?<br></div>Was the "failed" host =
fenced/rebooted?<br></div><div
class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div =
class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Apr 4, 2014 at 2:21 PM, Koen Vanoppen =
<span dir=3D"ltr"><<a
href=3D"mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com" =
target=3D"_blank">vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com</a>&gt;</span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 =
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div
dir=3D"ltr"><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div>So... It is possible for a fully
automatic =
migration of the VM to another hypervisor in case Storage connection =
fails?<br>
</div>How can we make this happen? Because for the moment, when we =
tested the situation they stayed in pause state.<br>
</div><div>(Test situation:<br><ul><li>Unplug the 2 fibre
cables from =
the hypervisor</li><li>VM's go in pause state</li><li>VM's
stayed in =
pause state until the failure was =
solved</li></ul></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockqu=
ote><div><br></div>as said before, it's not safe hence we (try
to) not =
migrate them.</div><div>They only get paused when they actually access =
the storage which may not be always the case. I.e. the storage =
connection is severed, host deemed NonOperational and VMs are getting =
migrated from it, then some of them will succeed if they didn't access =
that "bad" storage =85 the paused VMs will remain (mostly, it can still =
happen that they appear paused migrated on other host when the disk =
access occurs only at the last stage of =
migration)</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>so
in other words, if =
you want to migrate the VMs without interruption it's not sometimes =
possible</div><div>if you are fine with the VMs restarted in short time =
on other host then power management/fencing will help =
here</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>michal<br><blockquote
=
type=3D"cite"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div =
class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" =
style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; =
margin-left: 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-color: rgb(204, =
204, 204); border-left-style: solid; padding-left: 1ex; position: =
static; z-index: auto; "><div dir=3D"ltr"><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><p>)</p><p><br></p></div>
They only returned when we restored the fiber connection to the =
Hypervisor=85<br></div></div></div></blockquote></div></div></blockquote><=
div><br></div>yes, since 3.3 we have the autoresume =
feature</div><div><br></div><div>Thanks,</div><div>michal</div><div><br></=
div><div><br><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div
class=3D"gmail_extra"><div =
class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" =
style=3D"margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; =
margin-left: 0.8ex; border-left-width: 1px; border-left-color: rgb(204, =
204, 204); border-left-style: solid; padding-left: 1ex; position: =
static; z-index: auto; "><div dir=3D"ltr"><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><div><br></div>Kind =
Regards,<br><br>Koen<br></div><br></div><div =
class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div
class=3D"gmail_quote">2014-04-04 =
13:52 GMT+02:00 Koen Vanoppen <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a =
href=3D"mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com" =
target=3D"_blank">vanoppen.koen@gmail.com</a>></span>:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 =
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div>So... It is possible for a fully
automatic =
migration of the VM to another hypervisor in case Storage connection =
fails?<br>
</div>How can we make this happen? Because for the moment, when we =
tested the situation they stayed in pause state.<br>
</div><div>(Test situation:<br><ul><li>Unplug the 2 fibre
cables from =
the hypervisor</li><li>VM's go in pause state</li><li>VM's
stayed in =
pause state until the failure was =
solved</li></ul><p>)</p><p><br></p></div>
They only returned when we restored the fiber connection to the =
Hypervisor...<br><br></div>Kind
Regards,<br><br>Koen<br></div><div =
class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div
class=3D"gmail_quote">2014-04-03 =
16:53 GMT+02:00 Koen Vanoppen <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a =
href=3D"mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com" =
target=3D"_blank">vanoppen.koen@gmail.com</a>></span>:<div>
<div><br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 =
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div =
class=3D"gmail_quote"><div class=3D""><div>----------
Forwarded message =
----------<br>From: "Doron Fediuck" <<a =
href=3D"mailto:dfediuck@redhat.com" =
target=3D"_blank">dfediuck(a)redhat.com</a>&gt;<br>
Date: Apr 3, 2014 4:51 PM<br>Subject: Re: [Users] =
HA<br></div></div><div><div
class=3D"h5"><div><div>
To: "Koen Vanoppen" <<a
href=3D"mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com" =
target=3D"_blank">vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com</a>&gt;<br>Cc:
"Omer Frenkel" =
<<a href=3D"mailto:ofrenkel@redhat.com" =
target=3D"_blank">ofrenkel(a)redhat.com</a>&gt;, <<a =
href=3D"mailto:users@ovirt.org"
target=3D"_blank">users(a)ovirt.org</a>&gt;,=
"Federico Simoncelli" <<a
href=3D"mailto:fsimonce@redhat.com" =
target=3D"_blank">fsimonce(a)redhat.com</a>&gt;, "Allon
Mureinik" <<a =
href=3D"mailto:amureini@redhat.com" =
target=3D"_blank">amureini(a)redhat.com</a>&gt;<br>
<br type=3D"attribution"><br>
<br>
----- Original Message -----<br>
> From: "Koen Vanoppen" <<a
href=3D"mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com" =
target=3D"_blank">vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com</a>&gt;<br>
> To: "Omer Frenkel" <<a
href=3D"mailto:ofrenkel@redhat.com" =
target=3D"_blank">ofrenkel(a)redhat.com</a>&gt;, <a =
href=3D"mailto:users@ovirt.org"
target=3D"_blank">users(a)ovirt.org</a><br>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 4:17:36 PM<br>
> Subject: Re: [Users] HA<br>
><br>
> Yes, indeed. I meant not-operational. Sorry.<br>
> So, if I understand this correctly. When we ever come in a =
situation that we<br>
> loose both storage connections on our hypervisor, we will have to =
manually<br>
> restore the connections first?<br>
><br>
> And thanx for the tip for speeding up thins :-).<br>
><br>
> Kind regards,<br>
><br>
> Koen<br>
><br>
><br>
> 2014-04-02 15:14 GMT+02:00 Omer Frenkel < <a =
href=3D"mailto:ofrenkel@redhat.com" =
target=3D"_blank">ofrenkel(a)redhat.com</a> > :<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> ----- Original Message -----<br>
> > From: "Koen Vanoppen" < <a =
href=3D"mailto:vanoppen.koen@gmail.com" =
target=3D"_blank">vanoppen.koen(a)gmail.com</a> ><br>
> > To: <a href=3D"mailto:users@ovirt.org" =
target=3D"_blank">users(a)ovirt.org</a><br>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2014 4:07:19 PM<br>
> > Subject: [Users] HA<br>
> ><br>
> > Dear All,<br>
> ><br>
> > Due our acceptance testing, we discovered something. (Document =
will<br>
> > follow).<br>
> > When we disable one fiber path, no problem multipath finds it =
way no pings<br>
> > are lost.<br>
> > BUT when we disabled both the fiber paths (so one of the =
storage domain is<br>
> > gone on this host, but still available on the other host), vms =
go in paused<br>
> > mode... He chooses a new SPM (can we speed this up?), put's =
the host in<br>
> > non-responsive (can we speed this up, more important) and the =
VM's stay on<br>
> > Paused mode... I would expect that they would be migrated =
(yes, HA is<br>
><br>
> i guess you mean the host moves to not-operational (in contrast =
to<br>
> non-responsive)?<br>
> if so, the engine will not migrate vms that are paused to do io =
error,<br>
> because of data corruption risk.<br>
><br>
> to speed up you can look at the storage domain monitoring =
timeout:<br>
> engine-config --get StorageDomainFalureTimeoutInMinutes<br>
><br>
><br>
> > enabled) to the other host and reboot there... Any solution? =
We are still<br>
> > using oVirt 3.3.1 , but we are planning a upgrade to 3.4 after =
the easter<br>
> > holiday.<br>
> ><br>
> > Kind Regards,<br>
> ><br>
> > Koen<br>
> ><br>
<br>
Hi Koen,<br>
Resuming from paused due to io issues is supported (adding relevant =
folks).<br>
Regardless, if you did not define power management, you should manually =
approve<br>
source host was rebooted in order for migration to proceed. Otherwise we =
risk<br>
split-brain scenario.<br>
<br>
Doron<br>
</div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div></div><br></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Users mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Users@ovirt.org">Users@ovirt.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users" =
target=3D"_blank">http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/us...
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
_______________________________________________<br>Users mailing =
list<br><a =
href=3D"mailto:Users@ovirt.org">Users@ovirt.org</a><br>http://lists.ovirt.=
org/mailman/listinfo/users<br></blockquote></div><br></body></html>=
--Apple-Mail=_288231F1-4E67-445C-BD5C-619AAD0235E3--
3684
days inactive
3684
days old
4 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
Barak Azulay -
Itamar Heim -
Koen Vanoppen -
Michal Skrivanek -
Sander Grendelman