Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

This project is now read‑only. Starting Monday, February 2, please use https://ibm-ceph.atlassian.net/ for all bug tracking management.

Bug 1585554

Summary:	[2.x] RFE - ceph-ansible rolling update for containerized cluster
Product:	[Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Ceph Storage	Reporter:	Vasishta <vashastr>
Component:	Ceph-Ansible	Assignee:	Sébastien Han <shan>
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:	ceph-qe-bugs <ceph-qe-bugs>
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	2.5	CC:	aschoen, ceph-eng-bugs, gmeno, nthomas, sankarshan
Target Milestone:	rc
Target Release:	2.*
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2019-01-23 14:15:04 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	1572368

Description Vasishta 2018-06-04 05:23:46 UTC

Description of problem:

Currently recommended way of upgrading a containerized cluster from 2.x to 2.y is manual way of upgrading which involves stopping the service, pulling new image, replacing old image name with new one in service name, reload the daemon and restart the service for each daemon on each node.

It would be great if rolling update is supported as existing manual way decreases usability if cluster has more nodes. As rolling update is supported  for upgrading a containerized cluster from 2.x to 3.x or from 3.x to 3.y, and ceph-ansible.3.z is being shipped with 2.x latest ceph, it seems like rolling-update can be supported for 2.x containerized cluster.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
ceph-ansible - 3.0.25-1.el7cp

Comment 4 Christina Meno 2018-06-13 15:24:05 UTC

We won't consider adding this feature in a Z stream

Comment 5 Yaniv Kaul 2019-01-23 14:15:04 UTC

(In reply to Gregory Meno from comment #4)
> We won't consider adding this feature in a Z stream

Therefore, closing.