Bug 1271266 - [Director] Director is deploying the lvm backend in a loop device that is not supported by GSS
Summary: [Director] Director is deploying the lvm backend in a loop device that is not...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED DEFERRED
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat OpenStack
Classification: Red Hat
Component: openstack-tripleo-heat-templates
Version: 7.0 (Kilo)
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
: 12.0 (Pike)
Assignee: Alan Bishop
QA Contact: Arik Chernetsky
URL:
Whiteboard:
: 1267396 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks: 1280012 1301427
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2015-10-13 13:49 UTC by Eduard Barrera
Modified: 2023-09-14 03:06 UTC (History)
16 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
: 1280012 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-12-13 20:02:48 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
tshefi: automate_bug+


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Knowledge Base (Solution) 2038263 0 None None None 2020-03-27 13:22:36 UTC

Description Eduard Barrera 2015-10-13 13:49:25 UTC
Description of problem:

RHOS Director is deploying the LVM backed by using a loop device for the disk. This is not aligned with the best practices we recommend to our customers to follow neither supported by GSS

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

RHOS Director 7

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Deploy an environment using LVM backend
2.
3.

Actual results:
the cinder-volumes volume group is deployed over a loop device

Expected results:
cinder-volumes volume group deployed in a supported way by GSS like cinder-volumes using his own physical disk 


Additional info:

This is not a feature request, it's a bug, director is not deploying the LVM in a supported way. You can use the sosreports attached in the attached customer portal case as a guide how customers are using openstack director deployed environemnts.

IMHO
- LVM should be deployed in a secondary disk by default, if not available, fail the installation and complain as mandatory

- We need also a plan to move from the current unsupported way to a supported way

Comment 2 Jack Waterworth 2015-10-13 14:11:28 UTC
this is easy to workaround after deployment. (at least for packstack configurations)

Create partition:
    # parted /dev/sdb mklabel msdos mkpart primary 0% 100%

Create PV:
    # pvcreate /dev/sdb1

Extend over new PV
    # vgextend cinder-volumes /dev/sdb1

Move data off of the loop device
    # pvmove /dev/loop0

Remove loop from volume group:
    # vgreduce cinder-volumes /dev/loop0

Delete loop device:
    # losetup -d /dev/loop0

Delete backing file:
    # rm /path/to/cinder-volumes/file

Remove losetup line from rc.local:
    # vi /etc/rc.local

Comment 4 Mike Burns 2015-10-15 16:08:43 UTC
The suggested fix here is to make ceph the default.  We probably want to clone this to docs once we have that fix so we can update the defaults with notes to change this.

Comment 5 Giulio Fidente 2015-11-02 17:45:11 UTC
I am moving this BZ to the tripleoclient. Do we want to switch the default in the templates? Also, there is a deployment param to use the controllers as Ceph OSDs. By using such a parameter we can do 1ctrl + 1compute, with Ceph, without the need to deploy an additional node as Ceph OSD. Is this doable?

Comment 6 Mike Burns 2016-04-07 20:54:03 UTC
This bug did not make the OSP 8.0 release.  It is being deferred to OSP 10.

Comment 10 Eric Harney 2016-10-14 14:38:45 UTC
Since this is only a data integrity concern for production deployments and LVM is not supported for production deployments, we can defer this to OSP11.

Comment 11 Paul Grist 2017-02-09 22:44:33 UTC
We have 2 threads going on here:

1 - LVM loopback issue, which I think has a workaround and it's not a supported back end.

2 - requests to make ceph a default instead as means of avoiding unsupported LVM customer case bugs - again, LVM is not a supported back end for RHOS.  This is a larger discussion and we had started to discuss options but had not closed on a plan.

Dropping the priority and pushing to 12 as we are not planning to address this right now.

We need to consider if we will ever fix the original issue (1) and my preference will be to open a new bug or RFE around "ensuring customers know LVM is not supported on RHOS".

Comment 16 Alan Bishop 2017-04-18 15:31:44 UTC
Giulio posed a question.

Comment 19 Alan Bishop 2018-12-13 20:02:48 UTC
I'm deferring this, at least until LVM is supported in production.

Comment 20 Gregory Charot 2020-03-27 13:22:37 UTC
*** Bug 1267396 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 21 Red Hat Bugzilla 2023-09-14 03:06:40 UTC
The needinfo request[s] on this closed bug have been removed as they have been unresolved for 1000 days


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