Bug 1238332
| Summary: | unending remove brick undetermined state | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Gluster Storage | Reporter: | Lubos Trilety <ltrilety> |
| Component: | rhsc | Assignee: | Ramesh N <rnachimu> |
| Status: | CLOSED CANTFIX | QA Contact: | RHS-C QE <rhsc-qe-bugs> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | rhgs-3.1 | CC: | anbabu, asriram, ltrilety, mlawrenc, nlevinki, rhs-bugs, sabose, sankarshan |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Known Issue | |
| Doc Text: |
When the console doesn't know that glusterd is not running on the host, removal of a brick results in an undetermined state (question mark). When glusterd is started again, the brick remains in an undetermined state. The volume command shows status as "not started" but the remove-brick status command returns null in the status field.
Workaround:
Stop/commit remove-brick from the CLI.
|
Story Points: | --- |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2016-04-13 06:25:22 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: | 1216951 | ||
|
Description
Lubos Trilety
2015-07-01 15:39:03 UTC
This seems like a corner case, why is the severity high? (In reply to Sahina Bose from comment #1) > This seems like a corner case, why is the severity high? Because it blocks work with the volume from GUI. However you're right it's kind of a corner case, changed to medium. Doc text is edited. Please sign off to be included in Known Issues. Edited doc-text. Edited text looks good to me A workaround has been suggested for this bug. Once glusterd is stopped on the server, console cannot perform actions on server - so closing this as we do not currently have a way to fix this scenario |