Description of problem: ------------------------- Few of the params in lvcache section are not required and will be auto-computed Following variables are not required: cachethinpoolname: gluster_thinpool_gluster_vg_sdd cachemetalvsize: 2G Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): --------------------------------------------------------------- RHHI-V 1.6 cockpit-ovirt-dashboard-0.13.5 How reproducible: ----------------- NA Steps to Reproduce: -------------------- 1. Enable lv cache Actual results: --------------- 1. cache lv meta size is computed 2. lv cache meta name is computed Expected results: ------------------ When the above said options are not mentioned, lv cache meta is automatically computed by LV which is more safer Additional info:
Hi sas, We can't remove "cachethinpoolname" as we have feature to attach specific thinpool to lv cache(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1712714) We can remove cachemetalvsize and let's it to be auto calculated.
(In reply to Gobinda Das from comment #1) > Hi sas, > We can't remove "cachethinpoolname" as we have feature to attach specific > thinpool to lv cache(https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1712714) > We can remove cachemetalvsize and let's it to be auto calculated. That's right. As I clarified in google chat, its the lvcachemetaname that I wanted to remove, but its a typo in the description
Tested with cockpit-ovirt-dashboard-0.13.6 All the optional params for lvcache are removed, leaving LVM to compute it by default. LV cache related params in the generated vars file looks like: <snip> gluster_infra_cache_vars: - vgname: gluster_vg_sdb cachedisk: '/dev/sdb,/dev/sdc' cachelvname: cachelv_gluster_thinpool_gluster_vg_sdb cachethinpoolname: gluster_thinpool_gluster_vg_sdb cachelvsize: 225G cachemode: writeback </snip>
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/RHBA-2019:2963