Bug 1477091
| Summary: | [Gluster-block]: Block-create with same name on another volume results in backend deletion of the original block volume. | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Gluster Storage | Reporter: | Sweta Anandpara <sanandpa> | |
| Component: | gluster-block | Assignee: | Prasanna Kumar Kalever <prasanna.kalever> | |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Sweta Anandpara <sanandpa> | |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | ||
| Priority: | unspecified | |||
| Version: | cns-3.9 | CC: | amukherj, kramdoss, pkarampu, prasanna.kalever, rcyriac, rhs-bugs, storage-qa-internal | |
| Target Milestone: | --- | |||
| Target Release: | CNS 3.10 | |||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | |||
| OS: | Unspecified | |||
| Whiteboard: | ||||
| Fixed In Version: | gluster-block-0.2.1-14.1.el7rhgs | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | ||
| Clone Of: | ||||
| : | 1545104 (view as bug list) | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2018-09-12 09:25:17 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: | 1545104, 1568861 | |||
|
Description
Sweta Anandpara
2017-08-01 08:30:23 UTC
I have run gluster-block creates and deletes in a loop, while verifying another bug 1452936 (with gluster-block-0.2.1-6 and glusterfs-3.8.4-33) , and I had not hit this then. Atin, is there a chance of any patches between 3.8.4-33 and 3.8.4-35 to have impacted gluster-block behaviour? (In reply to Sweta Anandpara from comment #2) > I have run gluster-block creates and deletes in a loop, while verifying > another bug 1452936 (with gluster-block-0.2.1-6 and glusterfs-3.8.4-33) , > and I had not hit this then. > > Atin, is there a chance of any patches between 3.8.4-33 and 3.8.4-35 to have > impacted gluster-block behaviour? If not, then it must be something to do with the steps that I am following for verifying bz 1456231. Apologies. Correction in the bug number mentioned in Description and Comment3 - bz 1464421 Resetting the blocker flag as this bug will not be hit in CNS environment. Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2018:2691 |