Bug 1519835
| Summary: | [ceph-ansible] - RHEL - rhceph-3 cdn repos needs to be enabled instead of rhceph-2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Ceph Storage | Reporter: | Vasishta <vashastr> |
| Component: | Ceph-Ansible | Assignee: | Sébastien Han <shan> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Sidhant Agrawal <sagrawal> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | high | ||
| Version: | 3.0 | CC: | adeza, aschoen, asriram, ceph-eng-bugs, gmeno, hnallurv, jbrier, kdreyer, nthomas, rperiyas, sankarshan, shan, vashastr |
| Target Milestone: | rc | ||
| Target Release: | 3.1 | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | RHEL: ceph-ansible-3.1.0-0.1.rc17.el7cp Ubuntu: ceph-ansible_3.1.0~rc17-2redhat1 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2018-09-26 18:16:43 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
Vasishta
2017-12-01 14:26:40 UTC
Hi Erin, Doc change working good, Thanks. Regards, Vasishta I can easily bump the version to 3 for 3.1 but I guess the right fix is to detect which subscription the customer has. How can we do that? Hi Sebastien, I had filed BZ with a naive idea that ceph-ansible could be able to enable right set of repos for RHCEPH 2.x so it could be done to RHCEPH 3.x customers also. Though I couldn't come up with a apt solution to detect subscription, with my minimum knowledge I could think of asking customer to set ceph_rhcs_version with apt value based on his subscription. Please correct me if I'm wrong, I think the current fix in PR 2563 would affect 2.x customer if we are providing latest ceph-ansible to 2.x customer if we have any further 2.x releases. Another solution I could think of was, If a customer has only one of the RHCEPH(2.x or 3.x) subscription, we could try enabling 2.x first, if it fails, we can enable 3.x. Anyway, I can speculate the confusion that would be created if a customer has both subscription. I request anyone in CC list to provide their views on this. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong anywhere in this comment. Regards, Vasishta Shastry AQE, Ceph Do you have a system on RHEL that I could play with? I'd like to try something subscription-manager command to see how we can detect the available subscription. Also, your comments are valid, I know the patch is not ideal and needs rework, I mostly pushed it this way so I can keep track of it. Thanks. Thanks for providing the machine, unfortunately, I could find a proper way to auto-detect customer's subscription. Perhaps, could we use the SKU to differentiate the subscriptions? Right now, we don't have a way to solve this BZ. As a workaround, the current doc to encourage people to specify their repo number via the ceph_rhcs_version variable is fine. Ken, any idea to solve this BZ? Thanks. The SKUs contain all supported RHCS versions. In other words, all SKUs that have the RHCS product will have both product versions available as repositories in subscription-manager: rhel-7-server-rhceph-2-*-rpms rhel-7-server-rhceph-3-*-rpms Vasishta, is there any other "first step" that a customer does to choose RH Ceph Storage 2 versus 3 that we could use here? Hi Ken, The first difference I could find is to enable respective (2/3) tools repo to install ceph-ansible. ( At present both 2.x and 3.x doc contains steps to enable all the repos, I'll file a doc BZ to remove steps to enable mon/osd/tools repo on various nodes as they are redundant) Regards, Vasishta Shatsry AQE, Ceph Good call Vasishta. In theory ceph-ansible could automatically detect which Yum repository is enabled on a host: rhel-7-server-rhceph-2-tools-rpms or rhel-7-server-rhceph-3-tools-rpms ... and then choose the product version based on that. Did you use rhcs.yml? Please ignore my previous comment. Typically, the package will give you a all.yml file which has "ceph_rhcs_version: 3", so you should use it. Version:
ceph-ansible-3.1.0-0.1.rc12.el7cp.noarch
In the latest package, the all.yml.sample file contains following line:
#ceph_rhcs_version: "{{ ceph_stable_rh_storage_version | default(2) }}"
Ok found the issue, PR upstream. "Resync rhcs_edits.txt" is in v3.1.0rc14 upstream. Indeed, if deploying rhcs 3 then setting ceph_rhcs_version: 3 is not necessary since it's already the default. Moving this bug to verified state. Verified in ceph-ansible version: ceph-ansible-3.1.3-1.el7cp.noarch in all.yml: ceph_rhcs_version: 3 Playbook installed version 3 based cluster using satellite. 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/RHBA-2018:2819 |