Bug 2028775
Summary: | [RFE] Allow containerized node-exporter to collect stats from the host storage devices | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Ceph Storage | Reporter: | Sergii Mykhailushko <smykhail> | |
Component: | Ceph-Ansible | Assignee: | Guillaume Abrioux <gabrioux> | |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Rahul Lepakshi <rlepaksh> | |
Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | ||
Priority: | unspecified | |||
Version: | 4.2 | CC: | anpicker, aschoen, bniver, ceph-eng-bugs, gabrioux, gmeno, ivan.datko, jfajersk, mmuench, nthomas, pgough, rlepaksh, tserlin, vereddy, ykaul | |
Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | FutureFeature | |
Target Release: | 4.3z1 | |||
Hardware: | x86_64 | |||
OS: | Linux | |||
Whiteboard: | ||||
Fixed In Version: | ceph-ansible-4.0.70.4-1.el8cp, ceph-ansible-4.0.70.4-1.el7cp | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | ||
Clone Of: | ||||
: | 2074512 (view as bug list) | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2022-09-22 11:21:04 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: | 2074512 |
Description
Sergii Mykhailushko
2021-12-03 09:36:08 UTC
Reassigning to Ceph Storage. We manage the OpenShift Monitoring stack. The image referenced here is under an OpenShift namespace, but I don't think it is maintained by us. I don't think this RFE is in the realms of the OCP monitoring platform. IIUC this looks like a standalone node-exporter has been deployed to monitor a Ceph, but it is not being managed by cluster-monitoring-operator. Hardcoding values config into/with the shipped image to fit this use case seems like the wrong solution, since the image will have other use cases that could be effected (CMO for example). I think this should be assigned to the storage team to evaluate an effective solution. It might also be worth taking a look at https://github.com/openshift/enhancements/pull/838 (In reply to Jan Fajerski from comment #1) > Reassigning to Ceph Storage. We manage the OpenShift Monitoring stack. The > image referenced here is under an OpenShift namespace, but I don't think it > is maintained by us. I think this is incorrect. We don't build our own node-exporter image for RH Ceph Storage, we just re-use OpenShift's component, someone from OpenShift must build this image I think. (In reply to Philip Gough from comment #2) > Hardcoding values config into/with the shipped image to fit this use case > seems like the wrong solution, since the image will have other use cases > that could be effected (CMO for example). I agree, I don't think this is the right solution here. @Sergii, could you elaborate a bit more on your deployment? Is it RHCS 4 related? In that case, I would simply patch ceph-ansible for that. > @Sergii, could you elaborate a bit more on your deployment?
> Is it RHCS 4 related? In that case, I would simply patch ceph-ansible for
> that.
Hi,
Thanks for looking into this.
In this particular scenario we're dealing with RHCS 4, yes.
Few questions however:
1. How would mounting host's root inside a container hurt the operations if that is used in the other use-cases? TBH i don't know what is that CMO, thus have little idea on the impact.
2. If we decide to go the way with pathcing ceph-ansible, any guidelines how can this be achieved?
3. In case someone needs it with RHCS 5, what would be the workflow w/o ceph-ansible then? Or should we just suggest manually overriding systemd units, as building-in the values into defaults is not that safe/optimal solution?
Sergii
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 (Red Hat Ceph Storage 4.3 Bug Fix update), 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-2022:6684 The needinfo request[s] on this closed bug have been removed as they have been unresolved for 120 days |