Bug 2227809
Summary: | snap-schedule: allow retention spec to specify max number of snaps to retain | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Ceph Storage | Reporter: | Milind Changire <mchangir> |
Component: | CephFS | Assignee: | Milind Changire <mchangir> |
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | sumr |
Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | 7.0 | CC: | ceph-eng-bugs, cephqe-warriors, dwalveka, hyelloji, tserlin, vshankar |
Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | Rebase |
Target Release: | 7.0z2 | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | ceph-18.2.0-171.el9cp | Doc Type: | Enhancement |
Doc Text: |
Feature: Provide a mechanism to retain a fixed number of snapshots irrespective of the snapshot cadence.
Reason: Along with daily, weekly, monthly and yearly snaps, users also need a way to mention the max number of snaps they need to retain if they feel that mds_max_snaps_per_dir (default: 50) is insufficient for their purpose.
Result: Users can retain retain number of snaphosts higher than the default. The caveat is that the config item mds_max_snaps_per dir has to be appropriately configured for the MDS as well as the Manager.
|
Story Points: | --- |
Clone Of: | 2227806 | Environment: | |
Last Closed: | 2024-05-07 12:09:47 UTC | Type: | --- |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Milind Changire
2023-07-31 14:50:06 UTC
Please specify the severity of this bug. Severity is defined here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/page.cgi?id=fields.html#bug_severity. 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 7.0 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-2024:2743 |