Bug 2185887
| Summary: | [cee/sd][cephadm][testfix] Zapping OSDs on Hosts deployed with Ceph RHCS 4.2z4 or before does not work after upgrade to RHCS 5.3z2 testfix | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Ceph Storage | Reporter: | Milind <milverma> | |
| Component: | Ceph-Volume | Assignee: | Guillaume Abrioux <gabrioux> | |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Vinayak Papnoi <vpapnoi> | |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | lysanche | |
| Priority: | medium | |||
| Version: | 5.3 | CC: | adking, ceph-eng-bugs, cephqe-warriors, gabrioux, mobisht, rmandyam, tserlin, vereddy | |
| Target Milestone: | --- | |||
| Target Release: | 5.3z3 | |||
| Hardware: | x86_64 | |||
| OS: | Linux | |||
| Whiteboard: | ||||
| Fixed In Version: | ceph-16.2.10-170.el8cp | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: |
.Zapping OSDs deployed prior to {storage-product} 4.3 works as expected
Previously, in old deployments, a `lv_uuid` matched more than one physical volume (PV). As a result, users could not zap OSDs with dedicated DB devices.
With this fix, `ceph-volume` looks for all PVs instead of assuming only one PM in the corresponding volume group, and zapping OSDs deployed prior to {storage-product} 4.3 works as expected.
|
Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | ||||
| : | 2190412 (view as bug list) | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2023-05-23 00:19:10 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: | 2190412 | |||
|
Comment 4
Milind
2023-04-13 12:52:17 UTC
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 5.3 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-2023:3259 |