Bug 1732787
| Summary: | [Tracker bug 1738394 ] Two block volumes are created for a single PVC claim when there are two block provisioner pods deployed in two different namespaces | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Gluster Storage | Reporter: | Rachael <rgeorge> |
| Component: | rhgs-gluster-block-prov-container | Assignee: | Humble Chirammal <hchiramm> |
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Rachael <rgeorge> |
| Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | ocs-3.11 | CC: | aramteke, hchiramm, jmulligan, knarra, kramdoss, madam, pprakash, rhs-bugs, rtalur |
| Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Regression, Tracking, ZStream |
| Target Release: | OCS 3.11.z Batch Update 4 | ||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | openshift-ansible-3.11.153-2 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2020-02-13 05:22:22 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: | 1738394, 1759837 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | |||
|
Comment 4
Humble Chirammal
2019-07-25 06:48:04 UTC
[RCA] If we want to deploy 2 provisioners, we have/should deploy the provisioners with **different** provisioner names. Otherwise the issue reported here would happen. This is happening because of a change in upstream with leader election as suspected or pointed out (https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1732787#c11) in previous comment. The leader election has been changed to provisioners, but since they are in different namespaces they cannot benefit from it. So please verify the behaviour with different provisioners and if it works as expected, we have to document it. We can convert this bugzilla to doc bug or create a new one accordingly. I agree with comment#20 and #21. This should be handled in {openshift,cns}-ansible. Upgrade can be handled via documentation,release note now and agree with John is suggesting. Kasturi, acked it for the release. I dont think we need to remove tracker though. Kasturi, regarding comment#30 and #31, there not going to be any fix here about this issue, so I dont think FIV make sense here. It just depends on the ansible bug and its FIV. Yep, this can be ON_QA as we already passed 2 weeks after the merge. Moving to ON_QA. Kasturi, looks like there was already a build as mentioned in c#38, I am moving to ON_QA. |