[Starlingx-discuss] Discuss about one VM evacuation failure issue
zhipengs.liu at intel.com
Mon Jan 13 02:31:29 UTC 2020
Thanks for your clarification for current VIM design!
Could you retest and double check it again? Need to wait for enough time as mentioned in Barton’s comment.
>From current log, there are 2 VMs already resumed on ctrl-1 after it reboot.
The VIM is behaving correctly in this case. When a host with instances on it goes offline, the behaviour is as follows:
- As long as the host is disabled, attempt to evacuate the instances from the host (one at a time).
- When the host goes enabled (e.g. after it reboots) do not do any further evacuations (this could lead to an instance running on multiple hosts).
- Once the hypervisor on the host goes enabled, recover any failed instances by rebooting (or rebuilding if the reboot fails).
From: Wensley, Barton <Barton.Wensley at windriver.com>
Sent: 2020年1月11日 1:29
To: Liu, ZhipengS <zhipengs.liu at intel.com>
Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io
Subject: RE: [Starlingx-discuss] Discuss about one VM evacuation failure issue
I took a look through the logs and the VIM is behaving correctly in this case - I added my analysis to the LP.
From: Liu, ZhipengS [mailto:zhipengs.liu at intel.com]
Sent: January 9, 2020 9:23 PM
To: Wensley, Barton
Cc: starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io<mailto:starlingx-discuss at lists.starlingx.io>
Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] Discuss about one VM evacuation failure issue
I have been working on one OpenStack related LP below.
You can get detail information in LP comments.
Root cause was found after analyzed related log, it seems need a fix in NFV side.
As you are NFV expert, I’d like to get your comment before I can work out the solution.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Starlingx-discuss