Bug 1710994
| Summary: | [RFE] Raise the supported limit of volumes per trusted storage pool to 2000 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Gluster Storage | Reporter: | John Mulligan <jmulligan> |
| Component: | rhgs-server-container | Assignee: | Raghavendra Talur <rtalur> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Nitin Goyal <nigoyal> |
| Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | high | ||
| Version: | ocs-3.11 | CC: | asriram, knarra, kramdoss, madam, rcyriac, rgeorge, rhs-bugs, rtalur, sarumuga |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | FutureFeature, ZStream |
| Target Release: | OCS 3.11.z Batch Update 4 | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | rhgs-server-container-3.11.4-1 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
| Doc Text: |
If a user configured more than 1500 volumes in a 3 node cluster, and a node or glusterd service became unavailable, then during reconnection there was too much volume information to gather before the handshake process timed out. This issue is resolved by adding several optimizations to the volume information gathering process.
|
Story Points: | --- |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2019-10-30 12:32:53 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: | 1652461, 1732703 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | 1710996 | ||
|
Description
John Mulligan
2019-05-16 17:56:52 UTC
Heketi as of our 3.11.3 release of OCS will have a (configurable) maximum volume limit that defaults to 1000. To test this BZ you will need to configure heketi with a custom limit. I have also filed bz#1710996 to raise the default limit once we have tested it in gluster (this and dependent bzs). See BZ#1476223 for details about the limit in heketi and how to customize it. Our limit used to be 1000, not 1500? 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-2019:3257 |