Bug 1141433 - [SNAPSHOT]: output correction in setting snap-max-hard/soft-limit for system/volume
Summary: [SNAPSHOT]: output correction in setting snap-max-hard/soft-limit for system/...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Gluster Storage
Classification: Red Hat Storage
Component: snapshot
Version: rhgs-3.0
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
high
low
Target Milestone: ---
: RHGS 3.1.0
Assignee: Nagaprasad Sathyanarayana
QA Contact: Rahul Hinduja
URL:
Whiteboard: SNAPSHOT
Depends On:
Blocks: 1087818 1141639 1202842 1223636
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2014-09-13 10:09 UTC by Rahul Hinduja
Modified: 2016-09-17 13:05 UTC (History)
9 users (show)

Fixed In Version: glusterfs-3.7.0-3.el6rhs
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
: 1141639 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2015-07-29 04:36:12 UTC
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHSA-2015:1495 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE Important: Red Hat Gluster Storage 3.1 update 2015-07-29 08:26:26 UTC

Description Rahul Hinduja 2014-09-13 10:09:42 UTC
Description of problem:
=======================

When you set the snap-max-hard-limit/snap-max-soft-limit for volume or system, it prints the output as:

snapshot config: System for snap-max-hard-limit set successfully

AND,

snapshot config: vol1 for snap-max-hard-limit set successfully


Whereas it should be:
=====================

snapshot config: snap-max-hard-limit for System set successfully

And,

snapshot config: snap-max-hard-limit for vol1 set successfully


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
=============================================================

glusterfs-3.6.0.28-1.el6rhs.x86_64


How reproducible:
=================
1/1


Steps to Reproduce:
===================
1. gluster snapshot config snap-max-hard-limit 200
2. gluster snapshot config vol1 snap-max-hard-limit 100


Actual results:
===============

[root@inception ~]# gluster snapshot config snap-max-hard-limit 200
Changing snapshot-max-hard-limit will lead to deletion of snapshots if they exceed the new limit.
Do you want to continue? (y/n) y
snapshot config: System for snap-max-hard-limit set successfully
[root@inception ~]# 


[root@inception ~]# gluster snapshot config vol1 snap-max-hard-limit 100
Changing snapshot-max-hard-limit will lead to deletion of snapshots if they exceed the new limit.
Do you want to continue? (y/n) y
snapshot config: vol1 for snap-max-hard-limit set successfully
[root@inception ~]#

Comment 2 Sachin Pandit 2014-09-15 05:45:27 UTC
http://review.gluster.org/#/c/8191 is merged upstream, bug
is fixed as a part of mentioned patch. However as the bug does not
contain any blocker flag it is better not to include this downstream until Denali
release.

Comment 4 Sachin Pandit 2014-09-16 09:37:38 UTC
https://code.engineering.redhat.com/gerrit/#/c/32748 fixes the issue.

Comment 6 Shalaka 2014-09-18 05:53:01 UTC
Please add doc text for this known issue.

Comment 7 Shalaka 2014-09-21 04:06:22 UTC
Please review and sign-off edited doc text.

Comment 9 senaik 2015-06-22 12:30:48 UTC
Version : glusterfs-3.7.1-4.el6rhs.x86_64

Changes in the output are as below:

gluster snapshot config vol0 snap-max-hard-limit 100
Changing snapshot-max-hard-limit will limit the creation of new snapshots if they exceed the new limit.
Do you want to continue? (y/n) y
snapshot config: snap-max-hard-limit for vol0 set successfully

gluster snapshot config snap-max-hard-limit 100
Changing snapshot-max-hard-limit will limit the creation of new snapshots if they exceed the new limit.
Do you want to continue? (y/n) y
snapshot config: snap-max-hard-limit for System set successfully

Marking the bug 'Verified'

Comment 12 errata-xmlrpc 2015-07-29 04:36:12 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.

https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2015-1495.html


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.