CLOUDSTACK-3009: Fixed resource calculation CPU, RAM for accounts. by bwsw · Pull Request #3012 · apache/cloudstack

bwsw · 2018-11-07T03:46:39Z

Description

Bug fix for #3009

The view "service_offering_view" doesn't include removed SOs, as a result when SO is removed, the bug happens. The PR introduces a change for resource calculation changing "service_offering_view" to "service_offering" table which has all service offerings.

Must be fixed in:

4.12
4.11

Fixes: #3009

Types of changes

Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

The code was tested manually by running SQL inside MySQL console.
Marvin tests should be done.

rafaelweingartner · 2018-11-07T10:45:32Z

I think you should change the view to include this even when it is deleted, instead of changing the joining table/view. What do you think?

bwsw · 2018-11-07T13:42:14Z

@rafaelweingartner potentially it could lead to many bugs. I think the change could some other places to fix. Now it's a small fix, but can transform into a large one.

rafaelweingartner · 2018-11-07T13:43:38Z

Can you explain further why (your concerns)?I mean, if logically the result is the same when finding the physical interface, why would this affect other places?

bwsw · 2018-11-07T13:56:29Z

@rafaelweingartner it's not thst issue. It's for resource accounting.

rafaelweingartner · 2018-11-07T13:58:55Z

Ops, I was with the other issue in the cache... Sorry ;)
Let me load this one out of the HDD again...

rafaelweingartner · 2018-11-07T14:05:24Z

Ok, I looked in the code, and the table is used in some other places, specially the ServiceOfferingJoinVO. Therefore, the impacts might be big. It makes sense to use the service_offering if it has everything you need in that context.

bwsw · 2018-11-07T14:07:19Z

@rafaelweingartner may we add to 4.11.3 as well?

rafaelweingartner · 2018-11-07T14:09:31Z

Sure, but then the process is a little bit different. You need to target 4.11 branch. This will require you to cherry pick your current commit into 4.11.

bwsw · 2018-11-07T14:21:23Z

@rafaelweingartner Ok. then I leave this one too? Or close this one and open for 4.11?

rafaelweingartner · 2018-11-07T14:22:43Z

Actually, you can keep using this one. You only need to change the target branch here, and then update your bwsw:bug/accounting-bug-3009 branch to use 4.11 + the commit introduced here

bwsw · 2018-11-07T14:27:56Z

@rafaelweingartner Ok. Got it. I'll try. Not a git pro, thought...

rafaelweingartner · 2018-11-07T14:28:46Z

Ping me on Slack if you get lost.

bwsw · 2018-11-07T16:40:37Z

@rafaelweingartner Please, take a look. Looks like I managed it.

rafaelweingartner

That is it

bwsw · 2018-11-07T17:35:09Z

Looks like Jenkins is unhappy with moving merge branch from master to 4.11.

rafaelweingartner · 2018-11-07T18:38:11Z

It is a coincidence. It was not a problem because of the changes, but rather a worker that was working as it should.

rafaelweingartner · 2018-11-09T15:32:00Z

@bwsw what happened with this PR? I mean, there are now a lot of docker files, and other things that are not related to the change I reviewed.

bwsw · 2018-11-09T15:37:25Z

@rafaelweingartner I want to write additional E2E tests for the code. Thus, I started with Marvin and improved the Dockerfile for the simulator to fit Marvin development needs. It's a WIP work. Please, take a look at the email list for details.

bwsw · 2018-11-09T15:38:41Z

@rafaelweingartner Sorry about that)

yadvr · 2018-11-12T06:08:00Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2018-11-12T06:08:17Z

@rhtyd a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

yadvr · 2018-11-12T06:16:08Z

Moved to 4.11.2.0 as it sounds like a critical business issue if resource counts are wrong.

blueorangutan · 2018-11-12T06:49:49Z

Packaging result: ✔centos6 ✔centos7 ✖debian. JID-2425

yadvr · 2018-11-12T07:05:19Z

@blueorangutan test

blueorangutan · 2018-11-12T07:06:22Z

@rhtyd a Trillian-Jenkins test job (centos7 mgmt + kvm-centos7) has been kicked to run smoke tests

yadvr · 2018-11-12T08:59:18Z

Nevermind, I needed to run test quickly - have implemented minor fixes.

borisstoyanov · 2018-11-12T13:48:54Z

+        ram = int(self.get_resource_amount(RAM_RESOURCE_ID))
+
+        self.assertEqual(cores, self.services['service_offering_it_1']['cpunumber'] + self.services['service_offering_it_2']['cpunumber'])
+        self.assertEqual(ram, self.services['service_offering_it_1']['memory'] + self.services['service_offering_it_2']['memory'])


Test LGMT, let's wait for the results

blueorangutan · 2018-11-12T14:12:14Z

Trillian test result (tid-3164)
Environment: kvm-centos7 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server 7
Total time taken: 23884 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr3012-t3164-kvm-centos7.zip
Intermittent failure detected: /marvin/tests/smoke/test_deploy_virtio_scsi_vm.py
Intermittent failure detected: /marvin/tests/smoke/test_internal_lb.py
Intermittent failure detected: /marvin/tests/smoke/test_resource_accounting.py
Intermittent failure detected: /marvin/tests/smoke/test_vpc_vpn.py
Intermittent failure detected: /marvin/tests/smoke/test_host_maintenance.py
Smoke tests completed. 67 look OK, 1 have error(s)
Only failed tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File
test_01_so_removal_resource_update	`Error`	26.67	test_resource_accounting.py

borisstoyanov

^^ this looks like a Trillian problem

2018-11-12 10:24:06,987 DEBUG [c.c.c.CapacityManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-34:ctx-cff1820f job-1350 ctx-612653d9 FirstFitRoutingAllocator) (logid:936f6a14) Host: 2 doesn't have cpu capability (cpu:3, speed:1599) to support requested CPU: 4 and requested speed: 100
@bwsw Do you mind if we use 3 CPUs in the offering instead of 4?

bwsw · 2018-11-12T14:32:59Z

2018-11-12 10:24:59,254 INFO  [o.a.c.a.c.a.v.DeployVMCmdByAdmin] (API-Job-Executor-39:ctx-cda190fb job-1365 ctx-88aeda9f) (logid:7faecac3) Unable to create a deployment
 for VM[User|i-127-159-VM]
com.cloud.exception.InsufficientServerCapacityException: Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-127-159-VM]Scope=interface com.cloud.dc.DataCenter; id=1
        at org.apache.cloudstack.engine.cloud.entity.api.VMEntityManagerImpl.reserveVirtualMachine(VMEntityManagerImpl.java:215)
        at org.apache.cloudstack.engine.cloud.entity.api.VirtualMachineEntityImpl.reserve(VirtualMachineEntityImpl.java:200)
        at com.cloud.vm.UserVmManagerImpl.startVirtualMachine(UserVmManagerImpl.java:4492)
        at com.cloud.vm.UserVmManagerImpl.startVirtualMachine(UserVmManagerImpl.java:4057)
        at com.cloud.vm.UserVmManagerImpl.startVirtualMachine(UserVmManagerImpl.java:4044)
        at sun.reflect.GeneratedMethodAccessor535.invoke(Unknown Source)
        at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
        at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
        at org.springframework.aop.support.AopUtils.invokeJoinpointUsingReflection(AopUtils.java:338)
        at org.springframework.aop.framework.ReflectiveMethodInvocation.invokeJoinpoint(ReflectiveMethodInvocation.java:197)
        at org.springframework.aop.framework.ReflectiveMethodInvocation.proceed(ReflectiveMethodInvocation.java:163)
        at org.apache.cloudstack.network.contrail.management.EventUtils$EventInterceptor.invoke(EventUtils.java:107)
        at org.springframework.aop.framework.ReflectiveMethodInvocation.proceed(ReflectiveMethodInvocation.java:174)
        at com.cloud.event.ActionEventInterceptor.invoke(ActionEventInterceptor.java:51)
        at org.springframework.aop.framework.ReflectiveMethodInvocation.proceed(ReflectiveMethodInvocation.java:174)
        at org.springframework.aop.interceptor.ExposeInvocationInterceptor.invoke(ExposeInvocationInterceptor.java:92)
        at org.springframework.aop.framework.ReflectiveMethodInvocation.proceed(ReflectiveMethodInvocation.java:185)
        at org.springframework.aop.framework.JdkDynamicAopProxy.invoke(JdkDynamicAopProxy.java:212)
        at com.sun.proxy.$Proxy164.startVirtualMachine(Unknown Source)
        at org.apache.cloudstack.api.command.admin.vm.DeployVMCmdByAdmin.execute(DeployVMCmdByAdmin.java:50)
        at com.cloud.api.ApiDispatcher.dispatch(ApiDispatcher.java:150)
        at com.cloud.api.ApiAsyncJobDispatcher.runJob(ApiAsyncJobDispatcher.java:108)
        at org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.runInContext(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:581)
        at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(ManagedContextRunnable.java:49)
        at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call(DefaultManagedContext.java:56)
        at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
        at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
        at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(ManagedContextRunnable.java:46)
        at org.apache.cloudstack.framework.jobs.impl.AsyncJobManagerImpl$5.run(AsyncJobManagerImpl.java:529)
        at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:511)
        at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:266)
        at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1149)
        at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:624)
        at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)
2018-11-12 10:24:59,255 DEBUG [o.a.c.f.j.i.AsyncJobManagerImpl] (API-Job-Executor-39:ctx-cda190fb job-1365) (logid:7faecac3) Complete async job-1365, jobStatus: FAILED, resultCode: 530, result: org.apache.cloudstack.api.response.ExceptionResponse/null/{"uuidList":[],"errorcode":533,"errortext":"Unable to create a deployment for VM[User|i-127-159-VM]"}

Doesn't looks like connected with the test itself, rather an env problem.

bwsw · 2018-11-12T14:33:54Z

@borisstoyanov I don't care, just wanted SOs to vary.

borisstoyanov · 2018-11-12T14:35:40Z

@bwsw yes, you're right, issue is that blueorangutan's environment has hosts with 3 cores and we're requesting 4. Perhaps you could just change the offering to request 3?

…into bug/accounting-bug-3009

bwsw · 2018-11-12T14:38:34Z

@borisstoyanov Done

yadvr · 2018-11-12T16:15:20Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2018-11-12T16:16:19Z

@rhtyd a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

blueorangutan · 2018-11-12T16:44:56Z

Packaging result: ✔centos6 ✔centos7 ✖debian. JID-2431

yadvr · 2018-11-12T16:47:18Z

@blueorangutan test

blueorangutan · 2018-11-12T16:47:20Z

@rhtyd a Trillian-Jenkins test job (centos7 mgmt + kvm-centos7) has been kicked to run smoke tests

blueorangutan · 2018-11-12T23:20:31Z

Trillian test result (tid-3169)
Environment: kvm-centos7 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server 7
Total time taken: 22024 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr3012-t3169-kvm-centos7.zip
Intermittent failure detected: /marvin/tests/smoke/test_outofbandmanagement.py
Intermittent failure detected: /marvin/tests/smoke/test_vpc_vpn.py
Smoke tests completed. 68 look OK, 0 have error(s)
Only failed tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File

bwsw changed the title ~~Fixed resource calculation CPU, RAM for accounts.~~ WIP: Fixed resource calculation CPU, RAM for accounts. Nov 7, 2018

rafaelweingartner approved these changes Nov 7, 2018

View reviewed changes

rafaelweingartner assigned bwsw Nov 7, 2018

rafaelweingartner added the type:bug label Nov 7, 2018

rafaelweingartner added this to the 4.12.0.0 milestone Nov 7, 2018

bwsw changed the base branch from master to 4.11 November 7, 2018 16:05

bwsw changed the base branch from 4.11 to master November 7, 2018 16:06

bwsw changed the base branch from master to 4.11 November 7, 2018 16:40

rafaelweingartner approved these changes Nov 7, 2018

View reviewed changes

rafaelweingartner modified the milestones: 4.12.0.0, 4.11.3.0 Nov 7, 2018

bwsw changed the title ~~WIP: Fixed resource calculation CPU, RAM for accounts.~~ CLOUDSTACK-3009: Fixed resource calculation CPU, RAM for accounts. Nov 10, 2018

yadvr modified the milestones: 4.11.3.0, 4.11.2.0 Nov 12, 2018

rafaelweingartner approved these changes Nov 12, 2018

View reviewed changes

yadvr approved these changes Nov 12, 2018

View reviewed changes

yadvr added 2 commits November 12, 2018 14:27

clean python code

937cd75

add new smoketest to travis

c6d643d

borisstoyanov reviewed Nov 12, 2018

View reviewed changes

bwsw added 2 commits November 12, 2018 09:37

Fixed SO to request less resources to fit Trillian env.

1cec04b

Merge branch 'bug/accounting-bug-3009' of github.com:bwsw/cloudstack …

ea14f52

…into bug/accounting-bug-3009

yadvr approved these changes Nov 12, 2018

View reviewed changes

yadvr merged commit f6e600e into apache:4.11 Nov 13, 2018

Conversation

bwsw commented Nov 7, 2018

Description

Types of changes

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

Uh oh!

rafaelweingartner commented Nov 7, 2018

Uh oh!

bwsw commented Nov 7, 2018

Uh oh!

rafaelweingartner commented Nov 7, 2018

Uh oh!

bwsw commented Nov 7, 2018

Uh oh!

rafaelweingartner commented Nov 7, 2018

Uh oh!

rafaelweingartner commented Nov 7, 2018

Uh oh!

bwsw commented Nov 7, 2018

Uh oh!

rafaelweingartner commented Nov 7, 2018

Uh oh!

bwsw commented Nov 7, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rafaelweingartner commented Nov 7, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

bwsw commented Nov 7, 2018

Uh oh!

rafaelweingartner commented Nov 7, 2018

Uh oh!

bwsw commented Nov 7, 2018

Uh oh!

rafaelweingartner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

bwsw commented Nov 7, 2018

Uh oh!

rafaelweingartner commented Nov 7, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rafaelweingartner commented Nov 9, 2018

Uh oh!

bwsw commented Nov 9, 2018

Uh oh!

bwsw commented Nov 9, 2018

Uh oh!

yadvr commented Nov 12, 2018

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Nov 12, 2018

Uh oh!

yadvr commented Nov 12, 2018

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Nov 12, 2018

Uh oh!

yadvr commented Nov 12, 2018

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Nov 12, 2018

Uh oh!

yadvr commented Nov 12, 2018

Uh oh!

borisstoyanov Nov 12, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Nov 12, 2018

Uh oh!

borisstoyanov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

bwsw commented Nov 12, 2018

Uh oh!

bwsw commented Nov 12, 2018 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

borisstoyanov commented Nov 12, 2018

Uh oh!

bwsw commented Nov 12, 2018

Uh oh!

bwsw commented Nov 7, 2018 •

edited

Loading

rafaelweingartner commented Nov 7, 2018 •

edited

Loading

rafaelweingartner commented Nov 7, 2018 •

edited

Loading

bwsw commented Nov 12, 2018 •

edited

Loading