Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 1298976
Error about lowering DC compatibility version appears when lowering cluster compatibility version
Last modified: 2016-01-27 05:20:04 EST
Created attachment 1115177 [details]
Description of problem:
When lowering cluster compat version, error appears with 'Cannot decrease data center compatibility version' even though data center compat version is lower than what I'm trying to set in cluster.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
1. have DC with cluster on compat version 3.6
2. set DC compat version to 3.5 or 3.4
3. try to set cluster compat version to 3.5
exact/correct error with information what's wrong or compat version set to lower version
2016-01-15 16:06:32,359 WARN [org.ovirt.engine.core.bll.UpdateVdsGroupCommand] (ajp-/127.0.0.1:8702-9) [88ebcf8] CanDoAction of action 'UpdateVdsGroup' failed for user admin@internal. Reasons: VAR__TYPE__CLUSTER,VAR__ACTION__UPDATE,ACTION_TYPE_FAILED_CANNOT_DECREASE_COMPATIBILITY_VERSION
Not reproducible on master
I guess that was fixed only on master and we have just to back-port the fix
Not reproducible on the 3.6 branch as well
Petr, I had followed the exact scenario from bug description, can you please check again and tell me how to reproduce ?
Sorry, I forgot to mention you have to have installed host in that cluster (not working with hosts either up or in maintenance)
As far as I see, the option to decrease a cluster version was issued by commit 1f9fa54a82474f5037200c29800f82419dc1f356
Looking at that commit I found the following comment in code
// decreasing of compatibility version is only allowed when no hosts exists, and not beneath the DC version
So, it seems that this is working as designed
As far as I understand, if you want to be supported when host is in Maintenance, a RFE suits more that a simple bug since this is working IMO exactly as expected.
Oved, please decide how should we proceed with this BZ
I agree. However, not sure it is a relevant use-case.
(In reply to Oved Ourfali from comment #6)
> I agree. However, not sure it is a relevant use-case.
Working by design, closing.