Bug 1192452
Summary: | After fresh install of gluster rpm's the log messages shows error for glusterd.info file as no such file or directory | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Gluster Storage | Reporter: | surabhi <sbhaloth> | |
Component: | glusterd | Assignee: | Bug Updates Notification Mailing List <rhs-bugs> | |
Status: | CLOSED NOTABUG | QA Contact: | SATHEESARAN <sasundar> | |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | ||
Priority: | unspecified | |||
Version: | rhgs-3.0 | CC: | amukherj, nlevinki, pprakash, sasundar, sbhaloth, vagarwal, vbellur | |
Target Milestone: | --- | |||
Target Release: | --- | |||
Hardware: | Unspecified | |||
OS: | Unspecified | |||
Whiteboard: | glusterd | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | ||
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | ||
Clone Of: | ||||
: | 1211718 (view as bug list) | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2016-01-07 08:49:58 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: | ||||
Bug Depends On: | ||||
Bug Blocks: | 1211718 |
Description
surabhi
2015-02-13 11:49:43 UTC
Isn't this a duplicate of Bug 1110715? I am not sure about the root cause but i see the error for glusterd.info file in gluster logs after fresh install, which should not happen.Discussed with KP and it needs to be fixed in gluster-server.I would like to track this seperately until the root cause is found for both the bz's. (In reply to Prasanth from comment #2) > Isn't this a duplicate of Bug 1110715? Prasanth, This is a different from BZ 1110715. glusterd.info is generated lately, until a peer is probed or volume is created. So what happens in the fresh installation is, glusterd finds this glusterd.info file is missing and reports it as an error in glusterd logs. This bug is to move such an log message to INFO message, and not under ERROR category As this is expected as explained in #c4, closing this bug. |