Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.

Bug 684584

Summary: [RHEVM][VDSM]POOL_DESCRIPTION key was missing from metadata (KeyError: 'POOL_DESCRIPTION' ; Storage.StoragePool::(getInfo) Pool metadata error)
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 Reporter: David Botzer <dbotzer>
Component: vdsmAssignee: Saggi Mizrahi <smizrahi>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: yeylon <yeylon>
Severity: high Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 6.1CC: abaron, bazulay, danken, dron, iheim, ilvovsky, mkalinin, pstehlik, sgrinber, srevivo, ykaul
Target Milestone: rc   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard: storage
Fixed In Version: vdsm-4.9-60.el6 Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-12-06 07:08:56 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:
Attachments:
Description Flags
metadata_VDSM none

Description David Botzer 2011-03-13 16:30:37 UTC
Created attachment 484013 [details]
metadata_VDSM

Description of problem:
Start SPM failed because the POOL_DESCRIPTION key was missing from metadata
and appeared as DESCRIPTION (instead of POOL_DESCRIPTION)

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
IC104         - RHEVM
VDSM RHEL6    - build 51
VDSM RHEL5.6  - 2.2.63.21

How reproducible:
Random

Steps to Reproduce:
1. I Installed RHEVM IC104,
2. I have configured 1 DC, iSCSI, with 2 Hosts:
	Host RHEL6 
	Host RHEL5.6 (configured first)

3. I activated Host RHEL5.6 first and attached it a storage domain1
4. I activated the second host (RHEL6) (build 51 vdsm) and attached it a 
   storage domain2

  
Actual results:
The two hosts are contending in a loop

Expected results:
One host should be SPM and not contend every couple of seconds

Additional info:
This is related to the following bug, Which was fixed&verified for build 46, but doesn't describe using two hosts - RHEL 5.6 & RHEL 6
671154 - VDSM: getStoragePoolInfo fails due to missing POOL_DESCRIPTION in metadata (edit)
I did dump to the config file before changing the metadata (see attached metadata before changing and after[error] & vdsm.log)
-----------------
Thread-1366::ERROR::2011-03-13 16:28:46,726::sp::1195::Storage.StoragePool::(getInfo) Pool metadata error
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/share/vdsm/storage/sp.py", line 1188, in getInfo
    info['name'] = metadata[sd.POOL_DESCRIPTION]
KeyError: 'POOL_DESCRIPTION'
Thread-1366::ERROR::2011-03-13 16:28:46,727::task::854::TaskManager.Task::(_setError) Unexpected error
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/share/vdsm/storage/task.py", line 862, in _run
    return fn(*args, **kargs)
  File "/usr/share/vdsm/storage/hsm.py", line 1162, in public_getStoragePoolInfo
    return self.getPool(spUUID).getInfo()
  File "/usr/share/vdsm/storage/sp.py", line 1196, in getInfo
    raise se.StoragePoolActionError(self.spUUID)

Comment 3 David Botzer 2011-03-14 06:54:34 UTC
No, this is not the same case as:
bug 671154 - VDSM: getStoragePoolInfo fails due to missing POOL_DESCRIPTION in metadata 

Note that there are different hosts - one is a 5.x host and the other a 6.x host - perhaps backward compatibility has been broken

Comment 4 David Botzer 2011-03-14 08:01:24 UTC
In addition to the steps to reproduce:
Prior to steps 3 & 4
--------------------
* RHEL5.6 was in appropriate cluster (compatibility 2.2)
* RHEL 6 was in an inappropriate cluster (compatibility 2.2)
Later on, the cluster for RHEL6 was removed and created a new one with (compatibility 2.3)
---------------------
3. I activated Host RHEL5.6 first and attached it a storage domain1
4. I activated the second host (RHEL6) (build 51 vdsm) and attached it a 
   storage domain2

Comment 5 Marina Kalinin 2011-03-14 11:11:45 UTC
The DESCRIPTION belongs to the MASTER Domain Description.
And the missing field POOL_DESCRIPTION is another field.

Comment 6 Marina Kalinin 2011-03-14 11:12:31 UTC
This problems occurs now at 2 customers sites, running latest vdsm version (2.2.6).

Comment 7 Dan Kenigsberg 2011-03-14 14:08:53 UTC
(In reply to comment #6)
> This problems occurs now at 2 customers sites, running latest vdsm version
> (2.2.6).

Marina, the bug tracking this for 2.2.6 is bug 684725.

Comment 8 Marina Kalinin 2011-03-16 11:54:12 UTC
Ah, right Dan, thanks.
I noticed I put that command on the wrong bug after posting it ;)

Comment 9 RHEL Program Management 2011-04-04 02:08:14 UTC
Since RHEL 6.1 External Beta has begun, and this bug remains
unresolved, it has been rejected as it is not proposed as
exception or blocker.

Red Hat invites you to ask your support representative to
propose this request, if appropriate and relevant, in the
next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.

Comment 10 Dafna Ron 2011-05-18 13:12:19 UTC
adding comment for david since he was unable to change to verify:

Verified on IC118, RHEVM-Linux.
Works correctly for both hosts - RHEL56 & RHEL6
On two DCs (22, 23) with seperate storage domains)

Comment 11 errata-xmlrpc 2011-12-06 07:08:56 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, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2011-1782.html