Hide Forgot
Description of problem: Cu has upgrade the setup from OSP 6 to OSP 8. After the upgrade, Cu is seeing the WARNING messages in cinder log files. Cu wants to get rid of these messages. They don't want to alter the logging level but want to know the actual root cause of these errors and how to eliminate these messages. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): RHEL OSP 8 How reproducible: Everytime. Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: WARNING messages are coming in log file. Expected results: WARNING should not come in log file. Additional info: Below are the messages which are reported by Cu. Adding more messages in next comment. ~~~ 2016-08-29 13:39:58.173 4864 WARNING py.warnings [req-7d7ecad4-3ee2-4f64-b52e-2dd3aacd655b - - - - -] /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/oslo_db/sqlalchemy/enginefacade.py:241: NotSupportedWarning: Configuration option(s) ['use_tpool'] not supported 2016-08-29 13:39:58.218 4868 WARNING oslo_log.versionutils [-] Deprecated: RequestBodySizeLimiter() is deprecated as of Kilo in favor of oslo_middleware.RequestBodySizeLimiter and may be removed in Mitaka. ~~~
Could we please also request backport to OSP 7(Kilo)?
This looks like it landed in stable Ocata, okay to move it to POST for OSP11?
[ novaclient.v1_1 is deprecated ] 2016-08-13 11:15:10.267 1648 WARNING py.warnings [-] /usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/novaclient/v1_1/__init__.py:30: UserWarning: Module novaclient.v1_1 is deprecated (taken as a basis for novaclient.v2). The preferable way to get client class or object you can find in novaclient.client module. This warning message should be fixed in Ocata. The others are mostly warnings that were correctly appearing. Further issues along these lines can be handled in other bugs.
Eric, verifying wise would below be sufficient? Install OSP11 (openstack-cinder-10.0.1-0.20170308012116.a7521f5.el7ost) enabled debug=true review logs. Unsure which debug level customer used, debug=true should cover all options. No warnings/errors as mentioned on comments: #6 (first one) or #7 or #9 were found on Cinder's logs. If sufficient I'll changed to verified. Thanks
(In reply to Tzach Shefi from comment #11) > Eric, verifying wise would below be sufficient? > Yes, this looks good to me.
Verified, See #11-12 above.
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://access.redhat.com/errata/RHEA-2017:1245