Bug 844279
Summary: | Inconsistent output of "gluster peer status". Some nodes show up with hostname, others with IP | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Gluster Storage | Reporter: | Patric Uebele <puebele> |
Component: | glusterfs | Assignee: | Kaushal <kaushal> |
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Sudhir D <sdharane> |
Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | 2.0 | CC: | amarts, gluster-bugs, jschrode, ndevos, vbellur |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2012-09-04 08:14:30 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
Patric Uebele
2012-07-30 07:57:55 UTC
How did you 'gluster peer probe' the storage servers? Was it by IP or by hostname? You can have the hostname updated if you peer-probe the storage server again by hostname. Sometimes it is needed to do the peer-probe from both storage servers: (rhss01) # gluster peer probe server rhss02.example.com (rhss02) # gluster peer probe server rhss01.example.com Does this help? hmm, of course there is a 'server' too much in the 'gluster peer probe' commands :-/ (In reply to comment #2) > How did you 'gluster peer probe' the storage servers? Was it by IP or by > hostname? > I did add them by hostname: # gluster peer probe rhs1-2 > You can have the hostname updated if you peer-probe the storage server again > by hostname. Sometimes it is needed to do the peer-probe from both storage > servers: > > (rhss01) # gluster peer probe server rhss02.example.com > (rhss02) # gluster peer probe server rhss01.example.com > > Does this help? Yes, this does fix it. Thanks for confirming. This involves lot of changes internally to make it work consistently. Hence, for now, lets handle this issue using the work around suggested by ndevos. Could you make sure that the workaround is mentioned in the release notes? Thanks, Patric I'll write this up for the Red Hat Customer Portal at https://access.redhat.com/knowledge/solutions/201933 |