server: fix haproxy misconfiguration after VPC VR start by weizhouapache · Pull Request #8881 · apache/cloudstack

weizhouapache · 2024-04-04T10:29:57Z

Description

This PR fixes #8745

create vpc with 2 tiers
create lb in each vpc tier
check vpc vr, /etc/haproxy/haproxy.cfg contains the load balancer configuration of both 2 tiers.
restart vpc with cleanup. check the new vpc vr

expected: /etc/haproxy/haproxy.cfg in new vpc vr should be same as before (step 3)
actual without this PR: /etc/haproxy/haproxy.cfg in new vpc vr contains the load balancer configuration for only 1 tier.
with this PR: works as expected

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)
build/CI

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

Major
Minor

Bug Severity

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

weizhouapache · 2024-04-04T10:30:06Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2024-04-04T10:32:03Z

@weizhouapache a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

blueorangutan · 2024-04-04T10:46:54Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✖️ el7 ✖️ el8 ✖️ el9 ✖️ debian ✖️ suse15. SL-JID 9156

weizhouapache · 2024-04-04T10:58:18Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2024-04-04T11:00:03Z

@weizhouapache a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

codecov-commenter · 2024-04-04T11:47:02Z

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 35 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 13.17%. Comparing base (7a9985b) to head (e63cf69).

Files	Patch %	Lines
...ork/router/VirtualNetworkApplianceManagerImpl.java	0.00%	21 Missing ⚠️
.../router/VpcVirtualNetworkApplianceManagerImpl.java	0.00%	14 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               4.18    #8881      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     13.17%   13.17%   -0.01%     
+ Complexity     9215     9214       -1     
============================================
  Files          2725     2725              
  Lines        258215   258235      +20     
  Branches      40247    40249       +2     
============================================
- Hits          34017    34013       -4     
- Misses       219885   219911      +26     
+ Partials       4313     4311       -2

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

blueorangutan · 2024-04-04T11:56:53Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el7 ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 9157

weizhouapache · 2024-04-04T11:58:13Z

@blueorangutan test

blueorangutan · 2024-04-04T12:00:04Z

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

SadiJr · 2024-04-04T13:42:02Z

Hey @weizhouapache, is this PR already done to be reviewed?

blueorangutan · 2024-04-04T14:04:20Z

[SF] Trillian Build Failed (tid-9704)

weizhouapache · 2024-04-04T14:15:33Z

Hey @weizhouapache, is this PR already done to be reviewed?

@SadiJr
yes, it is ready for review and testing

weizhouapache · 2024-04-04T14:57:40Z

@blueorangutan test rocky8 kvm-rocky8

blueorangutan · 2024-04-04T15:00:03Z

@weizhouapache a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (rocky8 mgmt + kvm-rocky8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

blueorangutan · 2024-04-04T15:34:37Z

[SF] Trillian Build Failed (tid-9707)

blueorangutan · 2024-04-04T16:22:56Z

[SF] Trillian Build Failed (tid-9713)

blueorangutan · 2024-04-05T06:53:22Z

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-9714)
Environment: kvm-rocky8 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server r8
Total time taken: 43042 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr8881-t9714-kvm-rocky8.zip
Smoke tests completed. 109 look OK, 1 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File
test_01_migrate_VM_and_root_volume	`Error`	82.26	test_vm_life_cycle.py
test_02_migrate_VM_with_two_data_disks	`Error`	53.83	test_vm_life_cycle.py
test_08_migrate_vm	`Error`	0.07	test_vm_life_cycle.py

DaanHoogland · 2024-04-05T07:24:28Z

@blueorangutan test alma9 kvm-alma9

blueorangutan · 2024-04-05T07:26:05Z

@DaanHoogland a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (alma9 mgmt + kvm-alma9) has been kicked to run smoke tests

DaanHoogland

clgtm

sureshanaparti · 2024-04-05T13:08:37Z

+        final List<LoadBalancingRule> lbRules = new ArrayList<>();
+        createLoadBalancingRulesList(lbRules, lbs);
+        s_logger.debug("Found " + lbRules.size() + " load balancing rule(s) to apply as a part of VPC VR " + domainRouterVO + " start.");
+        if (!lbRules.isEmpty()) {


Suggested change

if (!lbRules.isEmpty()) {

if (lbRules.isEmpty()) {

return;

}

@sureshanaparti I don't think this return mid-method makes for better readable code.

sureshanaparti

minor suggestion, code lgtm

JoaoJandre

CLGTM, tested manually:

Created a VPC with two tiers (test1 and test2);
Created a VM for each one of this tiers;
Acquired one public IP for each one of this tiers;
Created load balancer rules in each public IP for each VM
Applied restart with clean-up in the VPC

The LB rules were created correctly and only one command was sent for it.

JoaoJandre · 2024-04-05T18:01:01Z

Merging based on approvals and manual testing.

blueorangutan · 2024-04-05T21:05:44Z

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-9724)
Environment: kvm-alma9 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server a9
Total time taken: 47144 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr8881-t9724-kvm-alma9.zip
Smoke tests completed. 109 look OK, 1 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File
test_01_create_redundant_VPC_2tiers_4VMs_4IPs_4PF_ACL	`Failure`	632.13	test_vpc_redundant.py

boring-cyborg Bot added component:networking component:vpc labels Apr 4, 2024

server: fix haproxy misconfiguration after VPC VR start

e63cf69

weizhouapache force-pushed the 4.18-fix-vpc-vr-haproxy-misconfiguration branch from d99ce9c to e63cf69 Compare April 4, 2024 10:58

JoaoJandre mentioned this pull request Apr 4, 2024

Restart VPC with clean-up not applying all LB rules #8765

Closed

13 tasks

weizhouapache marked this pull request as ready for review April 4, 2024 14:15

vishesh92 linked an issue Apr 4, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request

haproxy misconfiguration after restarting VPC with cleanup #8745

Closed

yadvr added this to the 4.18.2.0 milestone Apr 5, 2024

yadvr requested review from DaanHoogland and JoaoJandre April 5, 2024 08:49

DaanHoogland mentioned this pull request Apr 5, 2024

haproxy misconfiguration after restarting VPC with cleanup #8745

Closed

DaanHoogland approved these changes Apr 5, 2024

View reviewed changes

sureshanaparti reviewed Apr 5, 2024

View reviewed changes

sureshanaparti approved these changes Apr 5, 2024

View reviewed changes

sureshanaparti added the status:needs-testing label Apr 5, 2024

JoaoJandre approved these changes Apr 5, 2024

View reviewed changes

JoaoJandre merged commit a5508ac into apache:4.18 Apr 5, 2024

dhslove pushed a commit to ablecloud-team/ablestack-cloud that referenced this pull request Apr 9, 2024

server: fix haproxy misconfiguration after VPC VR start (apache#8881)

896cecb

DaanHoogland removed the status:needs-testing label Jan 28, 2026

Conversation

weizhouapache commented Apr 4, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description

Types of changes

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

Bug Severity

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

codecov-commenter commented Apr 4, 2024

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

SadiJr commented Apr 4, 2024 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 4, 2024

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 5, 2024

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Apr 5, 2024

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 5, 2024

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sureshanaparti Apr 5, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland Apr 5, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sureshanaparti left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JoaoJandre left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

JoaoJandre commented Apr 5, 2024

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Apr 5, 2024

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

8 participants

weizhouapache commented Apr 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

SadiJr commented Apr 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading