Bug 1477894 - Fedora Atomic Host logical volume renamed from docker-pool
Fedora Atomic Host logical volume renamed from docker-pool
Status: NEW
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: container-storage-setup (Show other bugs)
26
Unspecified Unspecified
unspecified Severity unspecified
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: Lokesh Mandvekar
Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
:
Depends On:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2017-08-03 03:28 EDT by Stef Walter
Modified: 2017-08-03 10:26 EDT (History)
6 users (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed:
Type: Bug
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
CRM:
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---


Attachments (Terms of Use)

  None (edit)
Description Stef Walter 2017-08-03 03:28:21 EDT
Description of problem:

Scripts that used lvresize to expand the docker volume on Fedora Atomic Host 25 no longer work on the Fedora Atomic Host 26.

It is routine to have to expand the volume in an Atomic Host qcow2 image to the actual disk size. One uses lvresize to do this. Scripts that did this in an automated fashion used to use the command:

   lvresize atomicos/docker-pool -l+100%FREE

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

# rpm -q container-storage-setup
container-storage-setup-0.6.0-1.giteb688d4.fc26.noarch

How reproducible:

Every time

Steps to Reproduce:
1. lvresize atomicos/docker-pool -l+100%FREE

Actual results:

  Logical volume docker-pool not found in volume group atomicos.

Expected results:

  Size of logical volume atomicos/docker-pool changed from 1,91 GiB (488 extents) to 3,34 GiB (855 extents).
  Logical volume atomicos/docker-pool successfully resized.

Additional info:

A workaround is to upgrade all scripts that were used to deploy an Atomic Host to deal with both the old and new names.

This bug was found by the Cockpit integration tests.
Comment 1 Stef Walter 2017-08-03 03:29:09 EDT
Colin, I'm CCing you as this is an example of an Atomic Host upgrade bug that is related to a single stream, and future tests related to upgrading within that stream.
Comment 2 Dusty Mabe 2017-08-03 08:36:48 EDT
I don't believe this is an 'upgrade bug', though. If you have a system that previously was installed with f25 and you rebase to f26 you don't have a problem.

This is more of a compatibility bug where scripts that used to work on f25 atomic host first bringup now fail. However, switching from devicemapper to overlay was something that we decided to do and did communicate out. What could we have done better?
Comment 3 Dusty Mabe 2017-08-03 08:37:49 EDT
> A workaround is to upgrade all scripts that were used to deploy an Atomic Host to deal with both the old and new names.

Fedora 25 atomic host is no longer really encouraged to be used so that might be a waste of time???
Comment 4 Colin Walters 2017-08-03 09:15:11 EDT
Yep, this is absolutely the kind of thing we need to smooth over for a single stream experience.  Related to this, we also still have the issue that the default LV name differs between ISO and cloud images.

In this particular case though, I think the changes in F27 in particular for unified pool fix a lot of the problem long term; in the kind of "casual use" scenario you don't need to think about LVM.  Experienced sysadmins for large installs are going to be able to cope with this type of thing relatively easily.
Comment 5 Stef Walter 2017-08-03 09:24:13 EDT
Is this going to be a problem with the Openshift Ansible scripts and RHEL Atomic Host? That was my worry when I highlighted it. 

If RHEL Atomic Host in 7.4.x or 7.5.x is going to pull a similar LV rename, then someone really should double check the popular Ansible scripts to see whether it hoses them or not.

Ideally Fedora Atomic's own automated tests would catch this. That's why we want:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives/Continuous_Integration_and_Delivery_of_Fedora_Atomic_Host

But in this case Cockpit integration testing highlighted this as a possible issue.
Comment 6 Daniel Walsh 2017-08-03 09:47:17 EDT
Of course we hope to soon remove any container runtime, other then runc off of atomic host.
Comment 7 Dusty Mabe 2017-08-03 10:26:21 EDT
(In reply to Stef Walter from comment #5)
> Is this going to be a problem with the Openshift Ansible scripts and RHEL
> Atomic Host? That was my worry when I highlighted it.

I have been running the installer on every release we do in Fedora atomic host. Have worked through any issues we've had, but we have had no issues with storage that I know of.

> 
> If RHEL Atomic Host in 7.4.x or 7.5.x is going to pull a similar LV rename,
> then someone really should double check the popular Ansible scripts to see
> whether it hoses them or not.

I'm not sure about that

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