Bug 1024418

Summary:	RFE: Add ability to decrease replica count on active volumes
Product:	[Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Gluster Storage	Reporter:	Wesley Duffee-Braun <wduffee>
Component:	glusterfs	Assignee:	Bug Updates Notification Mailing List <rhs-bugs>
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:	storage-qa-internal <storage-qa-internal>
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	high
Version:	2.1	CC:	rwheeler, ssaha, vbellur
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	FutureFeature
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Enhancement
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2014-10-10 19:00:30 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Wesley Duffee-Braun 2013-10-29 15:46:11 UTC

Description of problem:
Replica counts cannot be decreased on active volumes

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
RHS 2.1

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Create a 3-way replica volume

[root@rhs21-01vm ~]# gluster volume info my-threerep-volume
Volume Name: my-threerep-volume
Type: Replicate
Volume ID: 028f61c7-6fd1-4771-af05-a925b2972e64
Status: Started
Number of Bricks: 1 x 3 = 3
Transport-type: tcp
Bricks:
Brick1: rhs21-01vm:/bricks/brick5
Brick2: rhs21-02vm:/bricks/brick6
Brick3: rhs21-03vm:/bricks/brick7


2. Attempt to remove a brick and change replica count to 2

[root@rhs21-01vm ~]# gluster volume remove-brick my-threerep-volume replica 2 rhs21-02vm:/bricks/brick6


Actual results:

Removing brick(s) can result in data loss. Do you want to Continue? (y/n) y
volume remove-brick commit force: failed: Removing brick from a replicate volume is not allowed


Expected results:
brick removed, volume replica count updated to 2

Comment 3 Sayan Saha 2014-10-10 19:00:30 UTC

This feature is not widely requested. Users do not usually modify their replication level dynamically. Hence closing it as this is a low priority.