Created attachment 1325239 [details] Memory widget on the dashboard Description of problem: Memory used on the dashboard shows as 0.0 GiB used though actual memory consumption on all the hosts together is 53GiB. Host 1: ============================ [root@rhsqa-grafton1 ~]# free -m total used free shared buff/cache available Mem: 257677 39352 177774 35 40550 217277 Swap: 4095 0 4095 Host2 : ================================ [root@rhsqa-grafton2 ~]# free -m total used free shared buff/cache available Mem: 257677 12772 204045 26 40859 243871 Swap: 4095 0 4095 Host3: ======================================== [root@rhsqa-grafton3 ~]# free -m total used free shared buff/cache available Mem: 257677 2551 253686 25 1439 254182 Swap: 4095 0 4095 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): Red Hat Virtualization Manager Version: 4.1.6.2-0.1.el7 ovirt-engine-dashboard-1.1.2-1.el7ev.noarch How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install HCI with latest RHV-M 4.1.6.2 2. 3. Actual results: Though actual usage of memory is 53 GiB ovirt dashboard memory widget shows 0.00 percent and on mouse hovering on that shows 100 % GiB available. Expected results: Memory widget on the dashboard should show correct usage. Additional info:
engine and dwh logs are present in the link below. ==================================================== http://rhsqe-repo.lab.eng.blr.redhat.com/sosreports/HC/1491125/
Shirly, please take a look, especially in the DWH logs, what are: Exception in component tJDBCInput_1 java.lang.NumberFormatException: For input string: "6.1" at java.lang.NumberFormatException.forInputString(NumberFormatException.java:65) at java.lang.Integer.parseInt(Integer.java:580) at java.lang.Integer.parseInt(Integer.java:615) at ovirt_engine_dwh.minimalversioncheck_4_1.MinimalVersionCheck.tJDBCInput_1Process(MinimalVersionCheck.java:1225) at ovirt_engine_dwh.minimalversioncheck_4_1.MinimalVersionCheck.tJDBCConnection_2Process(MinimalVersionCheck.java:782) at ovirt_engine_dwh.minimalversioncheck_4_1.MinimalVersionCheck.tJDBCConnection_1Process(MinimalVersionCheck.java:657) at ovirt_engine_dwh.minimalversioncheck_4_1.MinimalVersionCheck.runJobInTOS(MinimalVersionCheck.java:3089) at ovirt_engine_dwh.minimalversioncheck_4_1.MinimalVersionCheck.runJob(MinimalVersionCheck.java:2853) at ovirt_engine_dwh.historyetl_4_1.HistoryETL.tRunJob_2Process(HistoryETL.java:8163) at ovirt_engine_dwh.historyetl_4_1.HistoryETL$3.run(HistoryETL.java:11674) 2017-09-13 02:10:18|a1AWZP|bZY3Rb|bZY3Rb|OVIRT_ENGINE_DWH|MinimalVersionCheck|Default|6|Java Exception|tJDBCInput_1|java.lang.NumberFormatException:For input string: "6.1"|1 Exception in component tRunJob_2 java.lang.RuntimeException: Child job running failed at ovirt_engine_dwh.historyetl_4_1.HistoryETL.tRunJob_2Process(HistoryETL.java:8186) at ovirt_engine_dwh.historyetl_4_1.HistoryETL$3.run(HistoryETL.java:11674) 2017-09-13 02:10:18|bZY3Rb|bZY3Rb|bZY3Rb|OVIRT_ENGINE_DWH|HistoryETL|Default|6|Java Exception|tRunJob_2|java.lang.RuntimeException:Child job running failed|1 2017-09-13 02:10:18|ETL Service Stopped
Please upgrade to latest 4.1.z. This issue was resolved in bug 1490272
Since the dwh fails to load, no data is collected. This is why the data is missing from the dashboard.
Hi shirly, I see that memory widget on the dashboard reports the utilization correctly. Host1: ====== [root@yarrow ~]# free -m total used free shared buff/cache available Mem: 96268 17751 78262 34 255 77998 Swap: 4095 0 4095 Host2: ================ [root@tettnang ~]# free -m total used free shared buff/cache available Mem: 96268 4074 91933 34 260 91672 Swap: 4095 0 4095 Host3: ============================ [root@zod ~]# free -m total used free shared buff/cache available Mem: 96268 4085 91928 34 255 91666 Swap: 4095 0 4095 Below are the versions of RHV-M and dwh: ======================================= RHV-M : Red Hat Virtualization Manager Version: 4.1.7.3-0.1.el7 dwh version : ovirt-engine-dwh-4.1.7-1.el7ev.noarch Thanks kasturi
Created attachment 1339640 [details] attaching screenshot for memory widget
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 1490272 ***