Bug 1678362 - Node replace documentation with respect to block seems incomplete
Summary: Node replace documentation with respect to block seems incomplete
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Gluster Storage
Classification: Red Hat Storage
Component: doc-Container_Native_Storage_with_OpenShift
Version: ocs-3.11
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
medium
Target Milestone: ---
: OCS 3.11.z Async
Assignee: Amrita
QA Contact: Rachael
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1810041
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2019-02-18 15:54 UTC by Raghavendra Talur
Modified: 2023-09-07 19:44 UTC (History)
18 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
: 1810889 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-03-10 10:26:53 UTC
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Raghavendra Talur 2019-02-18 15:54:21 UTC
Description of problem:

Refer to https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_openshift_container_storage/3.11/html-single/operations_guide/index#replace_block


Here, we are forcing the client(initiator) to discover the iscsi devices again but what happens when the app pod moves?
Won't it get the old IPs and fail to mount the device?

Is there a way to update the PVC/PV to make sure that the ISCSI mount plugin of Kubernetes gets the right IPs?

Comment 1 RamaKasturi 2019-02-20 12:20:35 UTC
This is an RFE which needs thorough testing and cannot be taken during 3.11.2. However it would be good to have a draft document with the steps.

Comment 10 Prasanna Kumar Kalever 2019-05-28 08:29:39 UTC
@Ratlur,

I doubt if I have correctly understand the question.

If your question is what happens when we do replace node and then the application pod is migrated from current node (when the replace node is done) to the other ? Will the new initiator gets new set of IP's while discovery ?

Answer is yes, after replace-block volume operation is done, whether we rediscover on the same node of the new one, it is supposed that we get new set of IP's only.

Hope that answers your question.

Let me know, if there is anything unanswered.

Thanks!

Comment 11 Prasanna Kumar Kalever 2019-05-28 08:31:23 UTC
> Answer is yes, after replace-block volume operation is done, whether we
> rediscover on the same node of the new one, it is supposed that we get new

s/same node of the new one/same node or the new one (node)/

Comment 12 Raghavendra Talur 2019-05-29 19:15:45 UTC
Prasanna

In the documentation, we have steps 12,13,14

Logout of the old portal by executing the following command on the initiator:
To re-discover the new node execute the following command:
Login to the new portal by executing the following command:

However, that is not a long term fix. Whenever that PV is mounted again either on the same node or a different one, it will refer to the portal+target IPs that are listed in the PV.
We want steps that illustrate to how update the PV with new IPs.

Comment 13 Prasanna Kumar Kalever 2019-05-30 06:34:33 UTC
Thanks for the clarification Talur. I got the missing piece. Leaving a needinfo on Humble, who might be able to help with the steps needed to update target portals in PV database after replace operation.

Comment 14 John Mulligan 2019-05-31 12:50:06 UTC
Great, dev will test if we can update the PV with new portal+target IPs values and get back to you with an update. If it is not changeable through the  PV this will need to be deferred or closed.

Comment 15 Humble Chirammal 2019-05-31 13:05:14 UTC
(In reply to Prasanna Kumar Kalever from comment #13)
> Thanks for the clarification Talur. I got the missing piece. Leaving a
> needinfo on Humble, who might be able to help with the steps needed to
> update target portals in PV database after replace operation.

Unfortunately its not possible to edit PVs. Its immutable.

Comment 16 Anjana Suparna Sriram 2019-05-31 13:32:58 UTC
Based on Comment 15, I moving this bug out of 3.11.4

Comment 19 Prasanna Kumar Kalever 2019-10-15 08:50:01 UTC
Anjana,

ping.

Comment 37 Amrita 2020-03-04 14:23:54 UTC
wrt to comment 26 and 30, I have mentioned a preview link to be reviewed. How do we move forward on this in the context of documentation?

Comment 39 Prasanna Kumar Kalever 2020-03-05 12:15:00 UTC
Just to avoid further confusion, Moving the bug back to POST, until the steps are finalized.


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