Bug 2213537

Summary:	[GSS]Incorrect information regarding PersistentVolumes and PersistentVolumeClaims in Inventory section at ocs-storagecluster-storagesystem
Product:	[Red Hat Storage] Red Hat OpenShift Data Foundation	Reporter:	Karun Josy <kjosy>
Component:	management-console	Assignee:	Sanjal Katiyar <skatiyar>
Status:	CLOSED NOTABUG	QA Contact:	Prasad Desala <tdesala>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	4.12	CC:	hnallurv, ocs-bugs, odf-bz-bot, skatiyar
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2023-06-21 10:15:16 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 Karun Josy 2023-06-08 13:27:34 UTC

#Description of problem (please be detailed as possible and provide log
snippets):

Incorrect information regarding PersistentVolumes and PersistentVolumeClaims in Inventory section at ocs-storagecluster-storagesystem in Openshift GUI.

It shows 2 PV  instead of 3. In the CLI we see all 3 persistentvolumes, based on disks, attached to the nodes (using openshift-local-storage to use local nodes disks like /dev/sdb). 


#Version of all relevant components (if applicable):
OCP 4.11
ODF 4.11


#Additional info:
Will be added in the following comments

Comment 5 Sanjal Katiyar 2023-06-08 14:21:18 UTC

Hi Karun,

This card shows only those PVCs that have Ceph based storage provisioners, that is:
  'ceph.rook.io/block',
  'cephfs.csi.ceph.com',
  'rbd.csi.ceph.com',

You can find the same in the official documentation: "The Inventory card shows the number of active nodes, PVCs and PVs backed by OpenShift Data Foundation provisioner".
(https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_openshift_data_foundation/4.12/html-single/monitoring_openshift_data_foundation/index)

I am assuming the PVCs in the attached screenshots should have been provisioned via "kubernetes.io/no-provisioner" ??

Please let me know if more info is needed.

Comment 6 Sanjal Katiyar 2023-06-08 14:22:58 UTC

> I am assuming the PVCs in the attached screenshots should have been
> provisioned via "kubernetes.io/no-provisioner" ??
> 

Or any other non Ceph (ODF) based provisioner.

Comment 8 Sanjal Katiyar 2023-06-15 10:36:39 UTC

Hi Karun,
Can we close this BZ ??