#ubuntu-cloud 2010-10-11
<mr-russ1> dummy cloud question.  How is the private cloud different from just using KVM?
<sidnei> mr-russ1, it's got an ec2-compatible API, so if you ever decide to move out, you can use the same tools.
<mr-russ1> okay, so mainly it provides better management interface (possibly) and ability to pick up the machines and move to another cloud.  does it provide HA by default, you need a bit more config for that with KVM.
<RoAkSoAx> ha as in infrastructure or ha as in instances?
<RoAkSoAx> and it doesnt buy deafault
<RoAkSoAx> mr-russ1
<RoAkSoAx> ^^
<uvirtbot> RoAkSoAx: Error: "^" is not a valid command.
<mr-russ1> ha as in instances.  If I put up X nodes, it will fail over if one node drops out.  like VMWare's HA stuff.
<RoAkSoAx> so as in libe migration
<RoAkSoAx> ylive
<RoAkSoAx> you could do HA by running a second instance if the application runninng in the fisrt one fail
<RoAkSoAx> but as in instance itself like live migration. no that i know of
<mr-russ1> okay, I still don't understand cloud computing stuff properly at all.
<RoAkSoAx> well i see it as a highly scalable cluster to be able to run virtualized servers
<mr-russ1> by scalable you mean add lots of nodes and can then run more machines?
<RoAkSoAx> htw you can also setup HA in kvm by failing over if the HW orr OS fails or similar and that is not instance related
<RoAkSoAx> i believe vmware does the same but
<RoAkSoAx> mr-russ1 yes that as scalable
<mr-russ1> I've got kvm running on a host and wondering what benefit I might get if I moved to the cloud when I'm looking at expanding.  Mainly I've had great difficultly understanding the difference between cloud and kvm ha.
<RoAkSoAx> KVM HA it is just 2 nodes. when one fails it failovers to the slave node that takes control of the service
<mr-russ1> okay.  on the cloud, do you assign machines to specific nodes?
<RoAkSoAx> a clouin the cloud you have a cluster of nodes that run instances using an hypervisor such as kvm in the case of ubuntu
<RoAkSoAx> you might have 10 physical nodes running varios virtual i stances
<RoAkSoAx> and provides scalability by allowing you to add more nodes easily to run more images
<mr-russ1> and you move images between nodes if you want to?
<RoAkSoAx> idk but it should be possible. im not cloud expert but kvm does provide live migration so i beleive thatit should be possible
<mr-russ1> it feels a lot like vmware vmotion and ha together.  run X physical servers with Y vm's/images and if 1 physical server dies, you keep going.  Need more grunt, add another node.
<mr-russ1> RoAkSoAx: you look like an expert compared with myself :)
<mr-russ1> thanks for answering my questions.
<RoAkSoAx> well in kvm in a 2 node cluster you do live migration and HA  but limited to two node. while a cloud provides scalabilty mainly. i just read and it shluld ssupport live migration soon
<RoAkSoAx> and no problem glad to help
<mr-russ1> hmm, reading the ubuntu install guide, you can't oversubscribe you cpu's with ec2.
<kim0> Hey folks, any idea why this is not working
<kim0> ec2-describe-images -o canonicalteam
<progre55> hi guys. how to bundle an image from a running instance? euca-bundle-image?
<niemeyer> progre55: No, that works with local files
<niemeyer> progre55: Is it an EBS image?
<progre55> niemeyer: no, just a simple image
<niemeyer> progre55: You'll likely need ec2-bundle-vol then
<progre55> oh, how about euca-bundle-vol?
<progre55> niemeyer: ^^
<niemeyer> progre55: Yeah, that should do it
<progre55> thanks
<niemeyer> progre55: np!
<RoAkSoAx> Hey anyone know if UEC already supports live migration?
<erichammond> kim0: -o expects a numerical AWS user id.  "amazon"  and "self" are special exceptions.
<kim0> erichammond: hey eric :)
<kim0> thanks
<kim0> any idea how to map the username into an ID
<erichammond> There is no username in AWS.  It's a figment of your imagination.
<erichammond> :)
<erichammond> (or some other tool you might be using?)
<kim0> hmm .. I see
<kim0> thanks
<erichammond> Though I suppose the user identifier in the new IAM might be considered a username of sorts. It just doesn't map to an account.
<kim0> The thing is .. when I view an AMI like http://developer.amazonwebservices.com/connect/entry.jspa?externalID=3872
<kim0> It says submitted by: canonicalteam, so I was thinking I can probably filter by that .. but it seems not
<erichammond> Ah, that is the username of the person who submitted the article on the AWS forum software.  It is unrelated to AWS itself.
<erichammond> You can see the numerical user id of the user that created any given AMI and then find out other AMIs created by the same account.
<erichammond> For example, ami-1a837773 on that page was created by userid 099720109477
<RoAkSoAx> kim0: ping
<kim0> RoAkSoAx: pong
<RoAkSoAx> kim0: quick question. If I change the Cloud IP, would it be better to manually change it too in the CLC at CLOUD_IP_ADDR="$addr" ?
<RoAkSoAx> in /etc/eucalyptus/eucalyptus-ipaddr.conf
<RoAkSoAx> kim0: or when I change it in the Web Interface, it is automatically detected?
<kim0> RoAkSoAx: I'm not sure .. hang on for an answer from the devs
<RoAkSoAx> kim0: ok ty ;)
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh smoser Daviey kirkland any ideas ^^ ?
<Daviey> RoAkSoAx: I think it's a suck it and see.  I know i have never needed to do it.
<Daviey> Sorry, couldn't be more help
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: yes. I would expect changing the CLC ip address would need a restart
<RoAkSoAx> Daviey: npp :) thanks though
<hggdh> you might also need to check the other components -- probably they will update the registration, but I never tried it
<smoser> kim0, fwiw, those pages i hope to get assinged and maintained by a different ec2 account
<smoser> so in the future that 'canonicalteam' would be something else anyway.
<smoser> was hoping to start that process today.
<smoser> ami pages are real PITA
<kim0> smoser: got ya .. thanks
<smoser> creating them takes 2+ weeks before they get acked
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: right... well for once, the keys will change, so that's for sure. then in the CC I can just specify the CLC ip, however IDK if I should also do that for the CLC itself
<RoAkSoAx> i guess I'll just have to try
<hggdh> you should do it on the CLC also
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: well I have changed the IP and everything seemed to be working, but I just wasn't sure if i should do a manual change of the CLC ip in the same CLC at /etc/eucalyptus/eucalyptus-ipaddr.conf instead of letting it be configured automatically
<RoAkSoAx> s/configured/obtained
<RoAkSoAx> becuase eitherway, i'm using a VirtualIP as the IP for the cloud
<RoAkSoAx> in an HA environment i'm setting up
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: you should not need to touch eucalyptus-ipaddr.conf, there are no IPs there
<hggdh> it is sourced by other scripts
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: that's the thing/. I'm not using a "regular static" ip for the CLC so idk if the sourcing will work as I expect
<RoAkSoAx> because I'm using a VirtualIP shared between two CLC's in HA
<hggdh> oh
<hggdh> now this is interesting
<RoAkSoAx> so if CLC1 fails, the CLC2 will have that VIP for the CLC
<hggdh> so it is a head-of-cluster scenario, where only one is active
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: I did a really simple test over the weekend, but I'm not sure how that'd work. So i'm redoing it :)
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: yeas an Active/Passive HA Cluster
<hggdh> and the DBs, where are they?
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: replicated with DRBD
<hggdh> I wonder what would happen with currently-running instances
<hggdh> well, anyway, on an active-passive scenario, the backup CLC would be down
<hggdh> so, after you move the VIP, you start it, and all is fine
<hggdh> both should be set to the VIP
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: I have 4 nodes, 1 CLC, 1 Walrus, 1CC/SC, 1 NC. So, theorically, if the CLC1 goes down, it shouldn't affect the CC nor the NC because the CLC2 will take over the service with the VIP
<RoAkSoAx> and that VIP is the Cloud IP
<hggdh> yes, I understand that. I am just unsure how the CLC recovers (never tested this scenario)
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: what I mean: I am *very* interested on your results
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: these are actually part of the Cluster Stack blueprint so there's still a long way to go... :)
<hggdh> heh
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: keep in mind that the CLC is the glue between all components
<hggdh> I know the CC recovers from failures, I just do not know what happens when the CLC fails
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: I thought the CC had in memory which instances are running, and if it fails, that tracking would be lost...?
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: I found that it recovers the sessions -- when it comes up it queries the NCs
<hggdh> I am not sure about how far it goes (security groups, iptables, etc)
<hggdh> I only found it by accident, when upgrading my test rig
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: if that's the case, it would be really simple to provide HA
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: if not, there would have to be some kind of sync daemon between two CC's in HA for the running instances
<hggdh> yes
<hggdh> I think the best course here would be to ask upstream about it
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: indeed, but I remember reading in one eucalyptus forum post that they will provide HA only for their paid version
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: we can ask some slightly different questions: what would happen if the CLC is restarted? The SC? The CC?
<hggdh> and then plan around it
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: for what I tested over the weekend, if the CLC1 fails and CLC2 takes control over the cluster without any problems. However, I haven't test this with running instances
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: which is good. Now we should try to find what happens with running sessions. But I think this is the way to go indeed
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: thank you for doing it :-)
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: either way, the hardest part will be to provide HA to the NC... which will have to be with live migration
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: why HA the NC? If the NC goes down, all instances there are already lost
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: and in any HA environment, it is expected to "lose" the connection for a few seconds while performing the failover
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: it is possible to setup a 2 node KVM clusters. Imagine that images are running in node1. If node1 fails, then node2 will take control of the service, by "live migrating" the instances from node1
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: however, to be able to do this, you need off course shared storage between the two nodes
<RoAkSoAx> so it is simple, if node1 fails, node2 willstart the instances that were running on node1
<hggdh> I can understand having the libvirt storage on a NAS-something, but there is no instance to recover -- they went down
<hggdh> so there is more than just restarting them -- the services being run must be set for recovery also
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: http://www.linux-ha.org/wiki/VirtualDomain_(resource_agent)
<hggdh> empty page?
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: check that _(resource_agent) is in the URL
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: heh, that was it, thank you
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: yes, this is interesting. How would we recover group security?
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: idk yet :) I actually haven't looked into HA for CC, NC and Walrus... but seems it's going to be a hard process :)
<hggdh> mind keeping me posted of your results?
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: sure ;)
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: btw.. one more thing what is the eucalyptus-cloud-publication upstart script for?
<hggdh> it runs the avahi service for the CLC
<hggdh> auto-registration
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: so, when everything is already registered, we only need eucalyptus and eucalyptus-cloud started?
<hggdh> hum
<hggdh> this is a question for Daviey ;-)
<RoAkSoAx> Daviey: ^^ :)
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: thanks btw :)
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: re-tested. So far, so good
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: \o/
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: will post config steps someday this weekl xD
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: how/where do I tell the walrus which CLC IP to use?
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: you have to register it
<hggdh> from the CLC via 'sudo euca_conf'
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: yeah but what I mean is that I want the walrus to contact the CLC via an specifically ipaddress. For example, the CC uses VNET_CLOUDIP
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: or, where do I till the CLC "use XX network interface"
<RoAkSoAx> s/till/tell
#ubuntu-cloud 2010-10-12
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: HA for the CLC is a reality :)
<kirkland> RoAkSoAx: whoa
<kirkland> RoAkSoAx: sweet :-)
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: indeed.. been working on it all day
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: btw.. do you have any scripts that monitor the status of eucalyptus?
<kirkland> RoAkSoAx: negative, i don't
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: ok np :) that'd be the next step.
<kirkland> RoAkSoAx: cool, okay, back to my holiday ;-)
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: enjoy dude ;)
<liam> hi I am new to using the cloud and I am wanting to create an ubuntu instance on ec2 and need some clarification to understand better. When I launch an ubuntu instance and ssh in to it can I use apt and install whatever I want?
<maruq> hi
<maruq> according to press release (http://www.canonical.com/news/ubuntu-10.10-server), it's possible to run AMIs offline in KVM. anyone know how to do it?
<maruq> I'm assuming I run Ubuntu Server locally, then somehow setup KVM with the AMI & push from there?
<maruq> can't find any docs on the server / cloud pages
<smoser> maruq, https://help.ubuntu.com/community/UEC/Images
<smoser> liam, yes. you can do whatever you want. you'll go in as the 'ubuntu' user, and have password less sudo
<smoser> liam, you can test drive (for 55 minutes) for absolutely free by going to http://10.cloud.ubuntu.com
<smoser> liam, maruq i'm out for the night. feel free to post questions here and i'll look for your responses tomorrow, or ping tomorrow.
<maruq> @smoser thanks.
<maruq> @smoser if I install the ec2-ami-tools, can I then bundle the image up & push back to EC2?
<liam> smoser: thank you
<liam> smoser, you still here?
<liam> so whats the story with hosting databases on the cloud? Do you have to use a special instance for your db and another for your os image/web app?
<smoser> liam, you could.
<smoser> you dont have to
<smoser> you could (on ec2) use their amazon rds.
<liam> smoser: so what is the advantage?
<smoser> basically they're just "virtual machines"
<liam> is it faster?
<smoser> amazon rds basically gives you a mysql server. you dont have to worry about managing the OS or the server.
<smoser> its just there and you can connect to it (i've never actually used it)
<liam> ok
<liam> smoser: so I want to create and ubuntu 10.04 server instance now which ami should I use?
<smoser> liam http://uec-images.ubuntu.com/releases/10.04/release/
<liam> ok thanks
<smoser> liam, note, that those do suffer from https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/mountall/+bug/649591
<uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 649591 in mountall "mountall spins eating cpu when 'nobootwait' option exists in fstab followed by a comma" [High,Fix committed]
<smoser> (see workaround there in my comment 3)
<liam> smoser: so it requries a change to a config file? (sorry not too familiar with this)
<smoser> liam, sorry. comment 5 is better.
<smoser> basically, just start the instance, then ssh in and
<smoser> sudo perl -pi -e 's/(nobootwait),(\S+)/$2,$1/' /etc/fstab
<liam> ok
<liam> smoser: so if I run this command from the cli ec2-run-instances ami-52794c26 --instance-type m1.small --region eu-west-1 --key ${EC2_KEYPAIR_EU_WEST_1}  it will start an instance??
<liam> smoser: so I dont have to start one in the management console?
<erichammond> liam: You may also have to specify --private-key and --cert or set the equivalent environment variables.
<erichammond> liam: See: ec2-run-instances --help
<liam> erichammond, yes I downloaded the key and cert
<erichammond> (aside: I don't know why these modern programmers avoid man pages)
<liam> erichammond, quick question can I stop the instance whenever I want and restart it?
<erichammond> liam: EC2 has different concepts of run/terminate and stop/start.
<erichammond> If you terminate an instance, you cannot restart it, though you can run a new instance of the same AMI.
<erichammond> If you stop an instance, you can start it again with the same disks attached.  However, this is only possible if you run an EBS boot AMI from the beginning.
<erichammond> Unless there is a particular reason not to, I recommend using EBS boot instances.
<liam> erichammond: The reason I am asking is that I am only going to start this instance for testing a web app so the web app wont actually be used. So can I start/stop it only when I need to test or does it have to be running 24/7 meaing I have to be always for it?
<liam> I have to be paying for it always*
<erichammond> You do not pay for the instance if it is stopped.  You do, however, continue to pay for the EBS volume (say, around $1.50/month)
<erichammond> I should say: You do not pay for the instance *while* it is stopped.
<liam> so the command ec2-terminate-instances completely wipes it?
<erichammond> Yes, a terminated instance cannot be recovered, nor can the ephemeral (local) storage (/ and /mnt) that were mounted on that instance.
<erichammond> By default, when you terminate an EBS boot instance, EC2 automatically deletes the EBS root disk for you as well.
<erichammond> It is possible to override this, and it is possible to take snapshots of the disk for more secure, long term storage.
<liam> erichammond: I have a magazine here with an article on starting an ec2 instance that says "you'll want to terminate or shut down your instances when they're not in use to save money. That's done via the ec2-terminate-instances command. Simply run it with the ID number of your instance (which can be determined via the ec2-describe-instances command), and your instance will terminate:" So is this info wrong??
<liam> here it is here http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/put-your-servers-cloud-amazon-ec2-and-ubuntu
<erichammond> liam: That info applies to S3 based or instance store AMIs.
<erichammond> EBS boot have added features that let you stop/start the instance and not pay for the instance hours while it is stopped.
<liam> erichammond: ok but that article says ec2 and shows an apache2 server running
<liam> so if I launch an ebs instance and want to stop it I run ec2-stop-instances "instance"
<erichammond> liam: The terminology is very confusing.  "S3 based" simply means that the image (AMI) is stored in S3 buckets. Instances run from these AMIs are sometimes called "instance store" instances because the root disk is stored on storage local to the instance, also called "ephemeral storage".
<erichammond> With "EBS boot" AMIs the image (AMI) is stored in an EBS snapshot (which, confusingly is also in S3, but not in way that you can tell it is).  Instances run from these might be called "EBS boot" or "EBS root" instances because the root disk is stored on an EBS volume created from the EBS snapshot.
<erichammond> To keep things simple, I just recommend starting with "ebs" AMIs and instances and know that you can stop and start them.
<liam> erichammond: ok thank you that is very helpful
<erichammond> In my opinion there are very few situations where you really need to use anything but an EBS boot instance and it relates to high IO on the root disk that cannot, for some reason, be moved over to an ephemeral disk like /mnt
<erichammond> Even then, it's likely not the performance but the cost that would be a factor.
<erichammond> but I digress.
<liam> I g2g so thanks all for your help.
<smoser> erichammond, natty versions are coming with man pages for ec2-api-tools
<smoser> (basically just help2man like output)
<kim0> hey folks, can somone please help this guy out http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1593645 Unable to ssh into instances started over UEC
#ubuntu-cloud 2010-10-13
<JadenKorn> Hello everyone.
<JadenKorn> I've been trying out the new Ubuntu in the Cloud - 55 minutes trial service, and after almost 30 minutes, I was still unable to properly log in via ssh.
<JadenKorn> Every time whenever I want to login, it ends the connection with a "Permission denied (publickey)" message on ssh.
<Hussain> hello fine people
<Hussain> i am using XCP
<Hussain> does anyone know about it
<Hussain> as i have some issues
<kim0> Hussain: heh .. is that Xen Cloud ?
<Hussain> yes
<kim0> I used to know about it yes
<kim0> in a previous life, I've written a python workflow to automate deployment with it
<kim0> however .. how does that relate to ubuntu
<Hussain> that doesnt but still i thought that the issue coklud be fixed from here
<Hussain> *could
<Hussain> i am having issues of connecting the vm's console from the web browser
<kim0> Hussain: are you getting the web UI to begin with ?
<Hussain> yup im using CGI perl for that
<kim0> ?!
<kim0> isn't it a browser
<Hussain> yes it is
<Hussain> the scripting is done using perl
<kim0> You're scripting it
<Hussain> and CGI for frontend
<Hussain> yes
<Hussain> that's what i said
<Hussain> i wanna access the vm's console from the browser
<kim0> from the browser doesn't mean from a script to me
<Hussain> uuumm okay so what do u think the issue is
<Hussain> is it possible
<Hussain> ?
<kim0> well .. I have to say that this really shouldn't be discussed in this channel .. perhaps ask in #xen
<kim0> However .. this may be helpful
<kim0> http://foss-boss.blogspot.com/2010/01/taming-xen-cloud-platform-consoles.html
<kim0> that's my blog where I've written almost everything I could find out about xcp consoles
<Hussain> yes i have already gone through post
<Hussain> i am having problems installing the socat on xcp
<Hussain> the XenAPI module is working fine
<kim0> Hussain: The best place to ask seems to be #xen-api
<kim0> from http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XCP_Overview
<Hussain> okay sure
<kim0> cool .. good luck :)
<Hussain> thanx mate
<Hussain> :)
<kim0> Hussain: btw in my post, socat is installed on your local machine not on xcp
<Hussain> okay i get it
<Hussain> ill try it and get back to you
<ablert> is there a public PPA or other repo that contains a more up to date version of the ec2 api tools?
<IdleOne> Don't have any questions kirkland but interested in seeing answers to others questions :)
<IdleOne> err I meant kim0 :)
<ablert> is anyone aware of a public PPA or other repo that contains a more up to date version of the ec2 api tools?
<smoser> ablert, what distro ?
<smoser> err... lucid ? maverick ?
<smoser> ablert, the maverick version of ec2-api-tools should be very up to date. there is a source rebuild in my ppa.
<smoser> we're workingon getting backports: https://bugs.launchpad.net/lucid-backports/+bug/649742
<uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 649742 in lucid-backports "backport maverick ec2-api-tools to lucid" [Wishlist,In progress]
#ubuntu-cloud 2010-10-14
<kim0> weird networking troubles: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1595384
<ablert> smoser, thanks! 10.04 (lucid) is what i was seeking
<smoser> ablert, so, when that bug is fixed, you'll be able to get it in backports
<smoser> and, in the future, that is the eventual landing place for such things
<maruq> hi guys
<maruq> I'm getting high load issues on 10.04, running on EC2
<maruq> I get the lovely " System information disabled due to load higher than 1" message
<maruq> and it shows up as load of ~1.20 in Ganglia
<maruq> but nothing really running in top
<flaccid> maruq: known bug in kernel
<flaccid> see https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/574910
<uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 574910 in linux-ec2 "High load averages on Lucid while idling" [Undecided,In progress]
<maruq> ah okay, thanks
<maruq> I Googled & saw a few things, but no real answer
<maruq> most people seemed to restart & fix, but doesn't work in my case
<flaccid> yeah its an accounting bug
<maruq> so no fixes at the moment?
<flaccid> see end of ticket, there are kernels published
<maruq> flaccid: thanks, just reading through things now ;p
<flaccid> coolio
<maruq> flaccid: there's a lot of random in that thread, but made it through
<flaccid> pretty typical of these kind of bugs :)
<maruq> so using one of the test kernels should fix my load issue for now?
<maruq> us-east-1 aki-84b75ded
<flaccid> yep
<maruq> and then just update to the latest AMI when it comes out - hopefully a couple of weeks, judging by date of post
<maruq> which should hopefully fix the t1.micro issue I was having as well ;p
<maruq> (Java = death)
<flaccid> hopefully maverick will fix all this, and there is daily maverick you can test already
<maruq> yeah I tested with Maverick, but unfortunately chef server doesn't install on it (rabbitmq config issue)
<maruq> so I guess I wait until the Chef guys fix their boot stuff, then jump to Maverick ;p
<flaccid> or just use debian squeeze :p
<maruq> okay, booted a node with that kernel & now it's running all the chef stuff
<maruq> I'll give it a little while to idle & let you know how things go
<maruq> thanks
<flaccid> cool np
<maruq> flaccid: just checked the top on that kernel, it's still looking high
<maruq> top - 05:16:08 up  3:25,  1 user,  load average: 1.10, 1.05, 1.00
<maruq> Tasks:  61 total,   2 running,  59 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
<flaccid> what percent cpu?
<maruq> mountall seems to be running at 42%, everything else is 0%
<flaccid> that could by one. you'd wanna check top under root
<flaccid> once you have it idle, see if you still get the high load
<maruq> what would be the best way to get it to idle... I'm assuming mountall is probably fairly important process, so best not to kill?
<flaccid> question is why is mountall running and what called it?
<maruq> sorry, what's the best way to find that out?
<flaccid> could be in an rc script
<maruq> it's being ran by root
<flaccid> you might want to check that the fstab entries are correct
<flaccid> and work out which is having the mount problem
<maruq> an ps aux shows it's ran as "mountall --daemon"
<flaccid> oh right
<flaccid> maybe ubuntu does this thing as a daemon
<flaccid> see man mountall
<flaccid> and see if there is such a service
<maruq> there seems to be stuff in /etc/init
<maruq> mountall.conf, mountall-net.conf, mountall-reboot.conf, mountall-shell.conf
<maruq> mountall.conf has "start on startup", "stop on starting rcS"
<flaccid> you'll need to research that. its bad that it is taking resources like that
<maruq> and "expect daemon"
<maruq> runs a script block containing "exec mountall --daemon $force_fsck $fsck_fix"
<flaccid> i don't agree with implementing such a daemon, but this is what ubuntu obviously has done
<maruq> from Googling, it looks as though erichammond may have similar thing
<maruq> http://alestic.com/2010/09/ec2-bug-mountall
<maruq> testing if that's the case now
<maruq> yep, that seems to have fixed it
<maruq> mountall is no longer stealing cpu
<maruq> top - 05:44:34 up 7 min,  1 user,  load average: 0.04, 0.31, 0.18
<maruq> ^^ looking a bit better there ;p
<uvirtbot> maruq: Error: "^" is not a valid command.
<maruq> looking a bit better there
<maruq> I'll let it play out for the 15mins or so, but looking good so far
<maruq> thanks
<maruq> top - 05:59:28 up 21 min,  1 user,  load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.05
<maruq> okay, think that's fixed my issues
<maruq> thanks flaccid & erichammond
<daker> kim0, anything about c.u.c ?
<kim0> daker: yeah indeed .. we got some more refinements to do
<smoser> erichammond, do you know (or anyone)
<smoser> ec2-run-instances; ec2-stop-instances ; ec2-start-instances
<smoser> i'm guessing each stop-start cycle is a new full hour charge
<erichammond> smoser: I am under the same assumption that each stop/start begins a new hour.  I don't remember if I got that from a reliable source or just made it up.  I might test it with a spare, unused account if I have a few minutes.
<smoser> testable after lag of account updates
<smoser> could even use ap-southeast-1 (or some other region you dont really use for that account)
<erichammond> I have any number of accounts that I created for test purposes and don't use at all :)
<smoser> i just did several start-stop cycles and thought "hey, this is costing me"
<smoser> erichammond, do you use consolidated billing ?
<smoser> i've considered doing that for my multiple accounts
<erichammond> smoser: No consolidated billing.  I only have a few accounts that get charged reguarly, and one of those is like a penny a month.
<smoser> erichammond, one more question
<smoser> with IAM, i'm under the impression there is no way to differenciate who launched an instance, right  ?
<smoser> ie, i can't really see that one account did 95% of the launches and another did 5 or something
<erichammond> smoser: correct
<smoser> they've got some work to do on IAM still
<erichammond> RightScale has been able to track and report that for years.
<erichammond> As long as you don't give people the AWS keys and make them use RightScale accounts to create resources.
<erichammond> I imagine it's a commonly requested feature of AWS.
<erichammond> since there are so many big companies using it now.
<smoser> yeah. but then you're either a.) interfacing with rightscale's api or b.) not interfacing with an api
<erichammond> exactly
<erichammond> With a few tweaks to rules and triggers, it might be possible to use tags to identify user ownership and only let users control instances they created.
<erichammond> Amazon will probably come up with a more comprehensive approach, though it may take another year or two :)
<erichammond> (when I say "tweaks" I mean AWS enabling new features, not things we can do today)
<smoser> erichammond, are you thinking you'll be able to attend (i'm assuming remotely) any UDS-N ?
<smoser> other than you being a grumpy stick in the mud, your voice is appreciated :)
<erichammond> I'm not traveling to Florida, but I should be able to attend afternoon sessions given the time zone.
<smoser> http://ubuntu-smoser.blogspot.com/2010/09/using-policies-in-aws-identity-and.html outlines my failed attempt at sharing a ec2 account with naming conventions
<smoser> i didn't think of doing it based on tags
<erichammond> Seems like tags would help reduce mistakes even if they can't yet be used to enforce rules.
<erichammond> smoser: stop/start charge test is in progress.  Waiting for results to show up on the activity page.
<erichammond> blog post written and waiting for the results :)
<timwood> Hi.  Does anyone know how to download an Amazon AMI image from S3 for use/conversion with a local UEC cloud?
<timwood> Or if it's even possible?  I'd love to use a public AMI that someone has created.
<timwood> in our local cloud
<timwood> anyone?
<smoser> timwood, its not really possible.
<smoser> you can launch the instance, then rebundle it
<smoser> and then take your rebundled image
<smoser> but you dont have access to the pristine images on ec2 that you do not own
<smoser> for ubuntu images, we make pristine images available to the public
<smoser> http:/uec-images.ubuntu.com
<timwood> smoser: thanks for the response.  It's a shame, I'd really like to get this particular image.  Maybe I'll contact the developer and see if they are willing to let me download it.
#ubuntu-cloud 2010-10-15
<tcliam_> hey what is the best way to track your usage on ec2?
<flaccid> rightscale has a pretty good usage estimate system
<tcliam_> flaccid: I am wanting to create an ebs instance for some testing but I want to stop it when I am not testing. How much will I have to pay if the ebs instance is stopped?
<flaccid> iirc you pay the same in terms of the ebs storage allocation because it is still allocated
<flaccid> but i could be wrong
<Nolar> yes, you pay for ebs storage, but not ec2 runtime
<flaccid> erichammond might know this
<flaccid> cool
<erichammond> know what?
<Nolar> <tcliam_> flaccid: I am wanting to create an ebs instance for some testing but I want to stop it when I am not testing. How much will I have to pay if the ebs instance is stopped?
<flaccid> flaccid: iirc you pay the same in terms of the ebs storage allocation because it is still allocated
<erichammond> yes
<erichammond> $0.10-$0.11/GB/mo, depending on the region
<erichammond> plus snapshots if you  took any
<tcliam_> erichammond: so if I create one using an AMI from here http://uec-images.ubuntu.com/releases/10.04/release/ in terms of storage size will these AMI's have a predefined disk size or does the ebs just dynamically resize as you put data on to it?
<Nolar> afaik the ebs amis default to 15GB volume
<Nolar> erichammond might know better, but afaik amazon charges you for actually allocated disk on their ebs backend
<tcliam_> Nolar: so a default install will mean paying for 15gb per month?
<Nolar> so even though the ami would have a 15gb root, it may not actually have allocated the full 15 on the ebs backend
<Nolar> ya, aka $1.50/mo :)
 * erichammond nods
<tcliam_> ah ok
<tcliam_> and the EBS size can be extended?
<erichammond> http://alestic.com/2009/12/ec2-ebs-boot-resize
<erichammond> http://alestic.com/2010/02/ec2-resize-running-ebs-root
<tcliam_> erichammond: thank you.
<Nolar> in my case, a fresh instance only uses 923M of space out of the 15GB, so I *think* i'd only get charged 10c a month if i stopped it
<Nolar> i've never actually tested that though :)
<tcliam_> so if the instance is not being using i.e. not requests is there even any point in stopping it to save money?
<tcliam_> no requests*
<Nolar> well, stopped = no instance use hourly charges
<Nolar> i know some folks who leave their instances stopped most of the day, but turn it back on for occasional jobs
<Nolar> saves having to re-provision
<tcliam_> so I just started my instance. Do I need to create an Elastic IP?
<flaccid> no
<tcliam_> flaccid: what is the Elastic IP for?
<flaccid> you tell me
<tcliam_> flaccid: assign a static IP to your instance?
<flaccid> oh you don't know what an EIP is ?
<tcliam_> no lol
<flaccid> its technically not static
<flaccid> tcliam_: http://aws.amazon.com/amis/1346
<tcliam_> thanks
<flaccid> np
<Nolar> it's 'elastic' ;)
<flaccid> thats what they call it
<flaccid> its technically a dynamic ip
<Nolar> sorta
<flaccid> thats what it is in the registry
<Nolar> it's a static address that can move dynamically between instances :)
<flaccid> technically every address is static, i.e. the IP address doesn't change
<Nolar> true
<flaccid> the point is its a dynamic IP, its not marked as static in the global ip registry and they simply route it
<Nolar> i think the point is, it's an ip which you can re-use as you change backend instances
<Nolar> whereas the normal address instances get are fixed to only that one instance
<Nolar> new instance, new ip
<flaccid> thats the elastic part. i was clarifying the point that its not static which is what tcliam_  asked
<tcliam_> ok
<tcliam_> I'm getting this when trying to ssh into the instance " Permission denied (publickey)."
<flaccid> tcliam_: make sure you are using an image that supports ssh and are using the correct ssh key
<tcliam_> flaccid: is it the keypair or the private key?
<flaccid> you use the private key or both
<flaccid> public key needs to be in ssh on the instance, which is usually done in rc4/boot
<tcliam_> flaccid: this is how I am trying to connect to it "ssh -i keypair.pem \ ubuntu@instancedns.com" is this correct?
<tcliam_> aha it was the "\" that was causing the prob
<flaccid> rightio
<tcliam_> flaccid: so just to clarify if I want to assign a domain name to my cloud instance I must get an elastic IP point the dns record for the domain name to the elastic IP and them in my ec2 settings route the domain name to the relevant instance?
<tcliam_> then*
<flaccid> pretty much
<flaccid> except the last part is called elastic ip attachment
<tcliam_> ok
<tcliam_> so you pay for the elastic ip by how many requests it recieves?
<tcliam_> receives*
<flaccid> no
<flaccid> see the ec2 pricing
<tcliam_> No cost for Elastic IP addresses while in use ??
<flaccid> correct
<tcliam_> so its free...
<flaccid> actually i'm wrong
<flaccid> see this http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/
<tcliam_> yes thats what I was looking at but I dont quite understand it...
<tcliam_> No cost for Elastic IP addresses while in use
<tcliam_>     * $0.01 per non-attached Elastic IP address per complete hour
<tcliam_>     * $0.00 per Elastic IP address remap â first 100 remaps / month
<tcliam_>     * $0.10 per Elastic IP address remap â additional remap / month over 100
<flaccid> well actually i'm right, because you pay for data transfer on any public ip, elastic or not
<nIMBVS> hello
<nIMBVS> anybody know where I can find some documentation regarding cloud-init's usage and configuration?
<nIMBVS> is this it: https://help.ubuntu.com/community/CloudInit ?
<nIMBVS> is cloud-init only configured through user-data scripts?
<nIMBVS> or can it be configured inside the instance as well (in the case I want to create a customized public AMI)?
<kim0> nIMBVS: hey
<nIMBVS> hi
<kim0> nIMBVS: no you don't need a custom ami
<kim0> cloud-init reads the configs over the user data indeed
<kim0> You can find extra docs at: /usr/share/doc/cloud-init/
<nIMBVS> so all configuration for cloud-init is done through user data? what about /etc/cloud? what it's for?
<kim0> nIMBVS: I won't claim autoritative knowledge .. but that seems to me to be the implementation of cloud-init itself
<kim0> the configuration and templates it needs to do its work
<kim0> nothing for you to care about ..
<kim0> from all the examples and use cases I've seen .. you only pass info thru user data
<kim0> which is really the use case that makes sense
<kim0> you might want to idle around through for any of the devs to maybe correct me
<kim0> Daviey: kirkland smoser hey folks .. The cloud forums are starting to pick up some steam
<Daviey> kim0: awesome
<kim0> Anyone who can answer technical questions, please follow the forums rss feed
<kim0> like for instance http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1597120
<kim0> I am trying to answer as much as I can
<kim0> RSS Feed: http://ubuntuforums.org/external.php?type=RSS2&forumids=392
<Daviey> kim0: "the front node seems to work fine. The nodes behind the switcher can ping between nodes but can not ping the ip outside the local network."
<Daviey> Confuses me somewhat
<kim0> Daviey: my understanding the cloud controller sees internet
<kim0> the rest of the nodes .. don't
<Daviey> kim0: Hm. that isn't what he said.
<kim0> what's "switcher"
<kim0> :)
<Daviey> i assume switch
<Daviey> but how can you be *behind* a switch
<Daviey> surely that must mean router?
<kim0> might just be physically
<kim0> it seems to be two machines only
<Daviey> Hmm.. then there should be no difference between 'front nodes' and 'nodes behind the switch'
<Daviey> if that is what he is saying....
<kim0> well .. if it's too unclear .. can you ask him to give more details
<Daviey> How does this forums lark worj then :)
<Daviey> work*
<kim0> what lark
<kim0> what's lark
<kim0> Daviey: I can reply asking for more info
<Daviey> done
<kim0> Daviey is awesome
<kim0> :D
<Daviey> heh
<Daviey> no u
<kim0> Daviey is there a way for me to run UEC without needing multiple machines
<kim0> I know there was this one node setup thing .. it was mostly a hack huh
<Daviey> kim0: you really need at least 2 tbh.
<Daviey> otherwise you are using an unsupported topology, making it less than useful
<kim0> Daviey: can it run over ec2
<kim0> would that be supported or close
<Daviey> close
<Daviey> you'd be using qemu rather than kvm
<Daviey> so, sloooooooooooooooooooooow
<kim0> so running vms slow as hell
<kim0> yeah :)
<kim0> Amazon should buy nested virt chips :)
<nIMBVS> kim0: you're the same kim0 that made this presentation: http://irclogs.ubuntu.com/2010/10/13/%23ubuntu-classroom.html#t17:00 ?
<kim0> nIMBVS: yeah
<nIMBVS> cool
<kim0> was I that bad :)
<nIMBVS> no. it was ok. very helpful ot clarify some things
<kim0> cool
<kirkland> kim0: sorry, i can't keep up with the forums
<kim0> kirkland: it's only an RSS
<kirkland> kim0: irc, mailing lists, LP bugs, and LP answers
<kim0> no need to poll for change :)
<kirkland> that's all i can do
<kirkland> kim0: sorry, someone else is going to have to cover that
<kirkland> kim0: i'm out of bandwidth
<kim0> ok no worries
<nIMBVS> does anybody know what gzip-rsyncable program is?
<nIMBVS> I didn't find it anywhere in the repository
<nIMBVS> nevermind. I found gzip-rsyncable
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: in the NC do I also haveb to specify "VNET_CLOUDIP="<CLC_ipaddress>"" ?
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: is it relevant if I do?
<kirkland> RoAkSoAx: yes, i think that's important
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: another question. When you run an instances, the 2GB image store file is stored at the Walrus right? So, what is stored in the NC?
<kirkland> RoAkSoAx: a local cached copy of that
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: so what happens if the Walrus dies? will the instance die too?
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: since the NC is a VM, is it possible to run instances inside that VM? what will it be necessary to do that because I get this error: [Fri Oct 15 13:23:55 2010][001562][EUCAERROR ] libvirt: internal error no supported architecture for os type 'hvm' (code=1)
<RoAkSoAx> [Fri Oct 15 13:23:55 2010][001562][EUCAFATAL ] hypervisor failed to start domain
<kirkland> RoAkSoAx: you need to make a minor change to the libvirt xml
<kirkland> RoAkSoAx: replace kvm with qemu for the hypervisor
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: thanks ;)
<kirkland> RoAkSoAx: np;  it's going to be *really* slow
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: yeah I just want it to test what would happen if the CLC dies while having running instances
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: i cant seem to find the xml file, where is it located exactly?
<RoAkSoAx> found it
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: Ok, Successfully started an image, it running pretty fast. Then I failed CLC1, CLC2 took control, and I runned a euca-describe-instances, and the instace I runned was there...
<kirkland> RoAkSoAx: sweet ;-)
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: though, the instances that were previously terminated are no longer there
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: is that *normal* ?
<RoAkSoAx> or even expected behaviour?
<timwood> Afternoon.
<timwood> Does anyone know how to increase the size of the root file system in the default Ubuntu EMI from the image store?
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: i think i just found a bug. I turned everything off but the CLC, and it still shows that there's a running instance
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: no CCs running at all?
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: nope not at all
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: here's how I discovered. I had terminated instances and 1 running instances. Then I did a failover (failed CLC1, CLC2 took control) and it showed the running instance but not the terminated ones
<RoAkSoAx> then powered off CC
<RoAkSoAx> still showed running instances
<RoAkSoAx> then powered off walrus
<RoAkSoAx> still showing running instance
<RoAkSoAx> then powered NC off
<RoAkSoAx> still kept on showing running instance
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: so this is either because of the failover or because there is a real bug there...
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: I am not sure either
<hggdh> but, anyway, interesting results :-)
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: indeed
<hggdh> RoAkSoAx: try bring up CC Walrus, and NC -- then see if this "running" instance is actually restarted on teh NC
<RoAkSoAx> hggdh: will do in a bit.. i really need to get off bed xD
<jeremydei> soren, I'm messing with building a maverick image with vm-builder .. it seems rather simple to extend to Maverick from lucid .. was there any reason this change wasn't included in the Maverick release?
<soren> jeremydei: Not a good one, no.
<jeremydei> soren, cool, i'll let u know how it goes :)  then maybe i'll look and see if i can do a pull-req for ya
<jeremydei> right now just editing the files direct, and it seems to be working
<RoAkSoAx> kirkland: quick question. the br1 in the CC is used to be able to communicate with the instances only when using --addressing private?
