-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Improve Guest OS additions and mappings #3609
Comments
I believe we effectively need to handle 2 tables: guest_os and guest_os_hypervisor (expecting that end-users will NOT have a need to change guest_os_category or guest_os_details) Current code behaviour (tested with 4.11/4.13):
Possible improvements as following: guest_os table
guest_os_hypervisor table
This would allow for:
|
I believe that the entire methodology around supporting hypervisor versions needs refactoring. Users/operators should not need to be independently adding OSes. CloudStack would also only 'present' the Guest OS lists supplied by the Hypervisor (via the json file) rather than an 'all-encompassing' list of hundreds of OS types. for example wrt CentOS, vSphere and XenServer only cares 5.x, 6.x 7.x, (64bit vs 32 bit) KVM doesn't care at all. So 10s of CentOS versions is pointless.... |
@PaulAngus Sounds good especially the "10s of CentOS" ... It would make the work of the operator easier. |
a middle ground solution could be to start IDs for new guest osses and - mappings at 10000 from now on autoadding them as we go on and leave old mapping at lower IDs. Users should not be bothered indeed but operators should have some control thopugh automation is best. It should be possible for an operator to dissallow an OS by removing its mapping or definition alltogether. |
@PaulAngus' suggestion has merit, adding the guest os map as json, but that would have to be on a either or basis. It does make the solution more solid but adds complexity to the change. side note: each os would need a |
@rhtyd There is a PR (#4699) that I think would solve this situation.
If this PR (#4699) is accepted, then we need to ensure that every PR, that add new Could you take a look a it? |
Thanks @GutoVeronezi I looked at the PR and I think it doesn't fully satisfy the requirements intended with this issue. I've asked my colleagues if they can look into your solution and expand on them since you don't want to expand scope of your work that would include the full set of changes I was looking for. @harikrishna-patnala/@Spaceman1984 are looking into the full feature who may update scope of their changes, I've been communicated at $dayjob that their feature will cover all my requirements and some additional scope. |
That's correct @rhtyd |
Moving this to next minor milestone, possibly to major in future. |
@nvazquez can you review if this needs any work or can be closed? cc @sureshanaparti |
@sureshanaparti is planning to work on it @rohityadavcloud |
Moving to the next milestone as advised by @sureshanaparti |
Has this been fixed with Suresh's PR now @harikrishna-patnala @shwstppr ? |
Hi my name is Aarushi Soni . I want to contribute to this issue . Is this issue still open ? |
@aarushisoni please have a look at https://github.com/shapeblue/hackerbook to get acquaited with the project. |
When adding support for new guest OS and their hypervisor mappings, the upgrade path(s) have historically assumed static guest OS
id
in the schema/upgrade paths even forid
which is an AUTO_INCREMENT column. This can break on environments who add their custom guest OS and hypervisor mappings. The implementation should be improved to allow insertion of guest OS either via APIs or via schema upgrade paths without making such static assumptions.ISSUE TYPE
COMPONENT NAME
CLOUDSTACK VERSION
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: