XCP-ng
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    Kuberenets cluster recipe not happy

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Xen Orchestra
    49 Posts 5 Posters 17.1k Views 1 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • BenjiReisB Offline
      BenjiReis Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
      last edited by

      A new version has been released last week or so that solves issues in the recipe.
      Did you encounter any issue with latest xoa?

      M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • M Offline
        mathiashedberg @BenjiReis
        last edited by

        @benjireis
        Yes currently the issue is with version 5.54.0. Tested about an hour ago

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • BenjiReisB Offline
          BenjiReis Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
          last edited by

          Latest XOA is 5.55.1, can you try with this version?

          M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • M Offline
            mathiashedberg @BenjiReis
            last edited by mathiashedberg

            @benjireis
            Looks like that fixed that issue. Now there is an issue with the cloud-config. Seems like gnupg2 is not installed

            sudo systemctl status cloud-final.service
● cloud-final.service - Execute cloud user/final scripts
   Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/cloud-final.service; enabled; vendor preset: enabled)
   Active: failed (Result: exit-code) since Mon 2021-02-15 09:20:37 EST; 5min ago
  Process: 649 ExecStart=/usr/bin/cloud-init modules --mode=final (code=exited, status=1/FAILURE)
 Main PID: 649 (code=exited, status=1/FAILURE)

            Relevant snippet: I could send you the whole snippet from sudo journalctl -u cloud-final.service if you would like

            Feb 15 09:20:34 node-1 cloud-init[649]: 0 added, 0 removed; done.
Feb 15 09:20:34 node-1 cloud-init[649]: Running hooks in /etc/ca-certificates/update.d...
Feb 15 09:20:34 node-1 cloud-init[649]: done.
Feb 15 09:20:34 node-1 cloud-init[649]: Errors were encountered while processing:
Feb 15 09:20:34 node-1 cloud-init[649]:  linux-image-4.19.0-14-amd64
Feb 15 09:20:34 node-1 cloud-init[649]:  linux-image-amd64
Feb 15 09:20:34 node-1 cloud-init[649]: FATAL -> Failed to fork.
Feb 15 09:20:34 node-1 cloud-init[649]: Cloud-init v. 18.3 running 'modules:final' at Mon, 15 Feb 2021 14:19:26 +0000. Up 15.00 seconds.
Feb 15 09:20:34 node-1 cloud-init[649]: 2021-02-15 14:20:34,984 - util.py[WARNING]: Package upgrade failed
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 cloud-init[649]: Reading package lists...FATAL -> Failed to fork.
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 cloud-init[649]: 2021-02-15 14:20:35,124 - util.py[WARNING]: Failed to install packages: ['apt-transport-https', 'ca-certificates', 'curl', 'gnupg2', 'software-properties-common']
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 cloud-init[649]: 2021-02-15 14:20:35,127 - cc_package_update_upgrade_install.py[WARNING]: 2 failed with exceptions, re-raising the last one
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 cloud-init[649]: 2021-02-15 14:20:35,128 - util.py[WARNING]: Running module package-update-upgrade-install (<module 'cloudinit.config.cc_package_update_upgrade_install' from '/usr/lib/python3/dist-packages/cloudinit/config/cc_package_update_upgrade_in
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 cloud-init[649]: /var/lib/cloud/instance/scripts/runcmd: 2: /var/lib/cloud/instance/scripts/runcmd: curl: not found
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 sudo[17486]:     root : TTY=unknown ; PWD=/ ; USER=root ; COMMAND=/usr/bin/apt-key add -
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 sudo[17486]: pam_unix(sudo:session): session opened for user root by (uid=0)
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 cloud-init[649]: E: gnupg, gnupg2 and gnupg1 do not seem to be installed, but one of them is required for this operation
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 cloud-init[649]: /var/lib/cloud/instance/scripts/runcmd: 3: /var/lib/cloud/instance/scripts/runcmd: curl: not found
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 sudo[17486]: pam_unix(sudo:session): session closed for user root
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 sudo[17505]:     root : TTY=unknown ; PWD=/ ; USER=root ; COMMAND=/usr/bin/apt-key add -
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 sudo[17505]: pam_unix(sudo:session): session opened for user root by (uid=0)
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 cloud-init[649]: E: gnupg, gnupg2 and gnupg1 do not seem to be installed, but one of them is required for this operation
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 cloud-init[649]: /var/lib/cloud/instance/scripts/runcmd: 4: /var/lib/cloud/instance/scripts/runcmd: add-apt-repository: not found
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 cloud-init[649]: /var/lib/cloud/instance/scripts/runcmd: 5: /var/lib/cloud/instance/scripts/runcmd: add-apt-repository: not found
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 sudo[17505]: pam_unix(sudo:session): session closed for user root
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 cloud-init[649]: Hit:1 http://security.debian.org buster/updates InRelease
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 cloud-init[649]: Hit:2 http://deb.debian.org/debian buster InRelease
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 cloud-init[649]: Hit:3 http://deb.debian.org/debian buster-updates InRelease
Feb 15 09:20:35 node-1 cloud-init[649]: Hit:4 http://deb.debian.org/debian buster-backports InRelease
Feb 15 09:20:36 node-1 cloud-init[649]: Reading package lists...
            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • M Offline
              mathiashedberg
              last edited by

              This post is deleted!
              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • BenjiReisB Offline
                BenjiReis Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                last edited by

                That's weird, I've just ran the recipe and everything went fine.
                Do you have any network issues explaining the installation problem?

                debian@master:~$ sudo systemctl status cloud-final.service
● cloud-final.service - Execute cloud user/final scripts
   Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/cloud-final.service; enabled; vendor preset: enabled)
   Active: active (exited) since Mon 2021-02-15 09:47:38 EST; 14min ago
  Process: 558 ExecStart=/usr/bin/cloud-init modules --mode=final (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
 Main PID: 558 (code=exited, status=0/SUCCESS)
                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • olivierlambertO Offline
                  olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                  last edited by

                  This or not enough RAM in the VM, explaining why fork failed to create a new thread…

                  M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • M Offline
                    mathiashedberg @olivierlambert
                    last edited by mathiashedberg

                    @olivierlambert @BenjiReis
                    Im also guessing too little RAM. The VMs were started with only 500MB, which i found strange. Any way for me to change this on initialization?

                    Im guessing i could change the Debian 9 template

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • BenjiReisB Offline
                      BenjiReis Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                      last edited by

                      Your VM should have 2G of RAM. Base on our Debian 10 template.
                      This is really weird.

                      M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • M Offline
                        mathiashedberg @BenjiReis
                        last edited by mathiashedberg

                        @benjireis Mine says "Original Template Debian Stretch 9.0"

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • BenjiReisB Offline
                          BenjiReis Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                          last edited by

                          Weird, which templates appear in your Hub view?

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • M Offline
                            mathiashedberg
                            last edited by

                            Just the standard ones:

                            • Alpine 3.10
                            • Centos 8.0
                            • Debian 10
                            • pfsense 2.4

                            My XOA has two pools

                            This issue is similar to the one i had earlier, where the image was being based on a different existing VM, now in this case its the debian 9 template.
                            I know the debian 10 template works fine as this is what i normally use

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • BenjiReisB Offline
                              BenjiReis Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                              last edited by

                              I do not understand how the wrong templates can be used by the recipe.

                              M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • M Offline
                                mathiashedberg @BenjiReis
                                last edited by

                                Yes it is quite strange.

                                This XOA has been in use for some time with a couple of pools added and removed over time, so I may be an edge case here.

                                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • olivierlambertO Offline
                                  olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                                  last edited by

                                  Delete the template, maybe it's a previous version 🙂

                                  M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • M Offline
                                    mathiashedberg @olivierlambert
                                    last edited by

                                    @olivierlambert I deleted all templates from XOA by going to "Hub" > "Templates" and using the trash icon to remove them. However it still appears that it uses debian 9. I could try to remove all templates from the system via the windows xcp-ng client. However it may be of importance to know that i have never used the debian 9 template before. While using this recipe was the first time i saw it.

                                    I remember trying the k8s recipe about a year ago, maybe that has tainted my setup in some way?

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • olivierlambertO Offline
                                      olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                                      last edited by

                                      How do you check it's using Debian 9 template exactly?

                                      M 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                      • M Offline
                                        mathiashedberg @olivierlambert
                                        last edited by

                                        @olivierlambert Under the VM page "Advanced" > "Misc"

                                        P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • P Offline
                                          pnunn @mathiashedberg
                                          last edited by

                                          @mathiashedberg I've just checked the ones I built that started all of this... they are deb 9.

                                          Peter.

                                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • olivierlambertO Offline
                                            olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                                            last edited by

                                            Can you provide a screenshot?

                                            Also, double checking inside the VM that's debian 9 with a cat /etc/issue. Because the original template doesn't mean anything.

                                            P 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • First post
                                              Last post