Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 1257099
gdeploy: checks missing for brick mounts when there are existing physical volumes
Last modified: 2016-09-17 10:40:38 EDT
Description of problem: When there are existing (old) Physical Volumes on hosts, gdeploy assumes that the backend brick setup is complete. If the succeeding steps involve volume create, and the brick mounts are missing, the volume gets created with bricks on root partition. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): gdeploy-1.0-6.el7rhgs.noarch.rpm How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Provide hosts and devices over which pvcreate has already been created. 2. Run gdeploy 3. Actual results: Volume creation succeeds with bricks on root partition Expected results: There should be a check for brick mounts in the script. Additional info:
Changes has been sent and will be available with next build.
Verified with gdeploy-1.0-10.el7rhgs.noarch # gdeploy -k -c gluster.conf INFO: Back-end setup triggered INFO: Peer management(action: probe) triggered INFO: Volume management(action: create) triggered PLAY [gluster_servers] ******************************************************** TASK: [Create Physical Volume on all the nodes] ******************************* failed: [rhshdp03.lab.eng.blr.redhat.com] => {"failed": true} msg: ['/dev/vdc Physical Volume Exists!'] failed: [rhshdp04.lab.eng.blr.redhat.com] => {"failed": true} msg: ['/dev/vdc Physical Volume Exists!'] FATAL: all hosts have already failed -- aborting PLAY RECAP ******************************************************************** to retry, use: --limit @/root/ansible_playbooks.retry rhshdp03.lab.eng.blr.redhat.com : ok=0 changed=0 unreachable=0 failed=1 rhshdp04.lab.eng.blr.redhat.com : ok=0 changed=0 unreachable=0 failed=1 You can view the generated configuration files inside /tmp/tmpwc39Nb
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-2015-1845.html