Thanks a lot James. we will try it out.

Hi All, Dose this mean Garden Container [windows] will be available along with Diego ? Thanks balaramaraju -- J L S P Balaramaraju

if you backup the databases before the upgrade, then you could restore the databases before the rollback deployment. we don't ever rollback at pivotal, we roll forward with fixes. i recommend testing

Thank Shannon for your detailed explanation. It is really useful for us. Have a good day, Regards, -- NGUYEN Hong Chau -- Nguyen Hong-Chau

You may need to supply your access log from the nginx in front of cc or the cc log because when I create a new buildpack, it's working just fine: $ CF_TRACE=true cf create-buildpack

Hi James, Thanks a lot , Please could you tell us what is the clean way of doing rollback from v210 to v202. Regards Lingesh M

Nguyen, The cause of your error is explained here: App Log Streaming - http://docs.cloudfoundry.org/services/app-log-streaming.html Your broker is returning syslog_drain_url in response to a bind

We have just published documentation for the service broker API specification v2.5, which adds support for arbitrary parameters with create, update, and

when you upgrade to a newer version of cf-release, it performs database migrations. the message is likely telling you that cf-release v202 code in the cloud controller is not compatible with the db

Hello Team , we are able to upgrade cf 202 to v210 in development environment , incase of any unknown issue we may want to rollback to 202. So we are trying to rollback from 210 to 202. But bosh not

here is a write-up about that from stark and wayne [1] the upcoming "route service" capability [2] will also support the ability to have pluggable

I'm sure there's an easier way to do it, but you could always map a DNS domain to your space that does not have public visibility, then deploy your apps to that domain. Josh Ghiloni Senior

We have a cf app that need not have public visibility. It's like a service, but it's a stateless app, so making it a droplet is convenient. It only needs to be visible to the other apps. How can I

After some more digging I found that it seems to be a problem in https://github.com/cloudfoundry/cloud_controller_ng/blob/master/app/controllers/runtime/buildpack_bits_controller.rb#L21 . The 'params'

Hi James Thanks for the info. I and my team greatly appreciate your time here. I believe we are running on v153 (or close to that), which is very old. I will have a look at those components more

once you get to this line where you make the app started [1], then the next step is that the cloud controller should be sending a NATS message targeted at a particular DEA selected to run the app. so

a file into an instance, that instance will be restarted. How does it monitor the behavior? Is there a list of commands whitelisted? I am curious because I am trying to find out what the whitelist

looking at the public tracker for diego, you can track as the team approaches this important release marker [1] named "Diego can replace DEAs". pivotal is using diego in our hosted production envs

Yes, though in your "https only" example the route service broker would be the one to interpret how to implement the attribute or service bound to the route and choose to either provide a proxy or

Hi. We are running on an extremely old version of CF (we are in the process of building one based on the latest), so I know there is very little the community may be able to help. But regardless...