Repository navigation
Upgrade from 4.14 to 4.15 fails when using XenServer 7.0/7.1/7.4 #4502
Copy link
Copy link
Closed
Milestone
Description
ISSUE TYPE
- Bug Report
COMPONENT NAME
Upgrade
CLOUDSTACK VERSION
Upgrade from 4.14 to 4.15
CONFIGURATION
2 hosts using XenServer 7.0/7.1/7.4
OS / ENVIRONMENT
XenServer 7.0(7.1, 7.4), two hypervisor hosts, CentOS 7.6 as management server OS.
SUMMARY
After upgrading from 4.14 to 4.15 and destroying the system VMs, they are not able to start again.
STEPS TO REPRODUCE
1. Install CloudStack 4.14 with XenServer 7.0 (7.1, 7.4), create some test objects - VMs, snapshots, networks, etc.
2. Follow the standard upgrade procedure
3. After the upgrade, destroy the system VMs (as described in the documentation)
EXPECTED RESULTS
Successful upgrade.
ACTUAL RESULTS
The new system VMs are not able to start, here is what is shown in the log:
2020-11-18 21:48:00,312 ERROR [c.c.v.VirtualMachineManagerImpl] (Work-Job-Executor-8:ctx-5c32b189 job-71/job-72 ctx-c90dd860) (logid:84ab8c0f) Failed to start instance VM[DomainRouter|r-14-VM]
com.cloud.utils.exception.ExecutionException: Unable to start VM:4acfa807-b78e-48f0-b615-177c9a9c954d due to error in finalizeStart, not retrying
at com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java:1266)
at com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.orchestrateStart(VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java:5461)
at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:566)
at com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.handleVmWorkJob(VmWorkJobHandlerProxy.java:107)
at com.cloud.vm.VirtualMachineManagerImpl.handleVmWorkJob(VirtualMachineManagerImpl.java:5628)
at com.cloud.vm.VmWorkJobDispatcher.runJob(VmWorkJobDispatcher.java:102)
at org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.runInContext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:620)
at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(ManagedContextRunnable.java:48)
at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call(DefaultManagedContext.java:55)
at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:102)
at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:52)
at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(ManagedContextRunnable.java:45)
at org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:568)
at java.base/java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:515)
at java.base/java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:264)
at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1128)
at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:628)
at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:834)
After some investigations with @rhtyd , it turned out the reason is that the systemvm.iso file is not detected by the host VM.
Reactions are currently unavailable
Activity
[-]Upgrade from 4.14 to 4.15 fails when using XenServer 7.0/7.1[/-][+]Upgrade from 4.14 to 4.15 fails when using XenServer 7.0/7.1/7.4[/+]vladimirpetrov commentedon Nov 25, 2020
I just tested that the issue is reproducible also with XenServer 7.4.
yadvr commentedon Nov 25, 2020
@vladimirpetrov to confirm regression can you do an upgrade of a XenServer 7.1 env from 4.11 or 4.13 to 4.14 and see how the system behaves? If you get the same issue we can lower the severity and address workaround in upgrade docs.
vladimirpetrov commentedon Nov 27, 2020
ACS 4.11 -> 4.14
ACS 4.13 -> 4.14
ACS 4.11 -> 4.15 and
ACS 4.13 -> 4.15 (all with XenServer 7.1) upgrades passed successfully.
andrijapanicsb commentedon Nov 27, 2020
Can you share more logs/info to let others also understand the issue as well.
Also, I see " CentOS 7.0 on the hosts." in the description, but you are saying it's the XS setup - do you have mixed hypervisors or why is there " CentOS 7.0 on the hosts." ?
DaanHoogland commentedon Nov 30, 2020
given that all these succeed and 4.14 -> 4.15 fail, there is likely to be something wrong in the upgrade path. Can you share the log of the initial start after upgrade @vladimirpetrov ,
tnx
yadvr commentedon Dec 1, 2020
My suspicion is that 4.14 systemvms (ssvm, cpvm and VRs) don't eject or fail to eject the systemvm.iso file. Can we confirm that @vladimirpetrov ?
DaanHoogland commentedon Dec 2, 2020
ah, if you ar right, that would than pertain to higher upgrade paths as well (4.15 -> future), making this slightly more pressing
5 remaining items
andrijapanicsb commentedon Dec 7, 2020
This need be fixed before 4.15 can go out.
yadvr commentedon Dec 7, 2020
I setup 4.14 + XS71 and did an upgrade test and was unable to reproduce this. I suspect in the upgraded env the old ssvm/cpvm were killed and new ssvm/cpvm got started before the 4.15 systemvm.iso/files/scripts were patched on the XS71 hosts which could explain the race conditions around old 4.14 systemvm.iso.
yadvr commentedon Dec 7, 2020
Lowered from blocker as we don't consistently reproduce this, let's wait for @vladimirpetrov @andrijapanicsb and others if they can confirm it works or doesn't work. Thanks.
PaulAngus commentedon Dec 7, 2020
andrijapanicsb commentedon Dec 7, 2020
yadvr commentedon Dec 8, 2020
I did an upgrade test and discussion with Vladi, the original issue was due to not waiting enough after an upgrade for the management server to copy all the systemvm.iso/files/scripts to the XS host post-upgrade.
In the latest upgrade env created by Vladi, from 4.14->4.15 with XS71, we couldn't reproduce the issue. However we had to restart the systemvms a few times due to a certificate setup issue likely caused due to:
From experience I've seen VMs runs slow on XS65, 71; they appear to run faster on more recent XS version (it could also be a hvm setting).
@vladimirpetrov can you add your notes/findings and confirmation.
yadvr commentedon Dec 9, 2020
PR fix #4525 pl test and review @vladimirpetrov thanks
vladimirpetrov commentedon Dec 9, 2020
The fix worked - well done, @rhtyd !
yadvr commentedon Dec 9, 2020
Fixed in #4525, kicking smoketests on health check PR #4131