Skip to content

Once again allow a VM to be on multiple networks from VPCs#3754

Merged
DaanHoogland merged 1 commit intoapache:4.13from
shapeblue:allowMultiNetVM
Dec 20, 2019
Merged

Once again allow a VM to be on multiple networks from VPCs#3754
DaanHoogland merged 1 commit intoapache:4.13from
shapeblue:allowMultiNetVM

Conversation

@DaanHoogland
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

revert b13acc6
to once again allow a VM to be on multiple networks from VPCs

Fixes: #3702

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?

    to once again allow a VM to be on multiple networks from VPCs
@DaanHoogland DaanHoogland changed the base branch from master to 4.13 December 9, 2019 10:13
@DaanHoogland
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@blueorangutan package

@blueorangutan
Copy link
Copy Markdown

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

@blueorangutan
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Packaging result: ✔centos6 ✔centos7 ✔debian. JID-449

@DaanHoogland
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@blueorangutan test

@blueorangutan
Copy link
Copy Markdown

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

@blueorangutan
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Trillian test result (tid-588)
Environment: kvm-centos7 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server 7
Total time taken: 26613 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr3754-t588-kvm-centos7.zip
Smoke tests completed. 77 look OK, 0 have error(s)
Only failed tests results shown below:

Test Result Time (s) Test File

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@GabrielBrascher GabrielBrascher left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM based on code review, if conditional removal looks ok on that context.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@borisstoyanov borisstoyanov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, manually verified the constraint is no more, I was able to deploy a VM directly into 3 tiers from a VPC. Other question is if reverting of this constraint would cause grief with people setup.

@DaanHoogland DaanHoogland merged commit 0b34971 into apache:4.13 Dec 20, 2019
@DaanHoogland DaanHoogland deleted the allowMultiNetVM branch December 20, 2019 13:10
DaanHoogland added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 20, 2019
* create template from snapshot regression (partly reverted) (#3767)

* Once again allow a VM to be on multiple networks from VPCs (#3754)

to once again allow a VM to be on multiple networks from VPCs

* convert protocal names to be found as labels (#3747)

* convert protocal names to be found as labels

* format

* filter hosts to query on zone wide storage (#3733)

* config: add isdynamic flag in configuration response (#3729)

Co-authored-by: Wei Zhou <ustcweizhou@gmail.com>
DaanHoogland added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 23, 2019
* 4.13:
  Added zone check for attach iso (#3755)
  config: add isdynamic flag in configuration response (#3729)
  filter hosts to query on zone wide storage (#3733)
  convert protocal names to be found as labels (#3747)
  Once again allow a VM to be on multiple networks from VPCs (#3754)
  create template from snapshot regression (partly reverted) (#3767)
ustcweizhou pushed a commit to ustcweizhou/cloudstack that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2020
to once again allow a VM to be on multiple networks from VPCs
@DaanHoogland DaanHoogland removed their assignment Jun 13, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants