Description of problem: ----------------------- With Ansible-2.8, LV cache feature is not working. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): ------------------------------------------------------------- RHV 4.3.5 Ansible-2.8.3 How reproducible: ----------------- Always Steps to Reproduce: ------------------- 1. During deployment enable LV cache. with cache data disk as value Actual results: --------------- Failed to setup LV cache Expected results: ----------------- LV cache should be setup successfully Additional info: ---------------- This issue is also reported by oVirt community user using Ansible-2.8 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1720261 Sachi is aware of this issue and has upstream issue - https://github.com/ansible/ansible/issues/56501 - opened for the same
As a workaround for this issue, Sachi has suggested to have the disk in the VG also as input along with cache disk <snip> Now since version 2.8 the behavior has changed, where all the existing pvs which which were part of volume group has to be provided. Like: - name: Extend volume group lvg: state: present vg: foo_vg pvs: "/dev/sdb,/dev/sdc" pv_options: "--dataalignment 256K" </snip>
Gobinda already has a patch that settles the issue[1] where the LV cache will be attached to the specific thinpool, along with that patch, it will be easily deducible to find the PV of the VG. With that information, ansible vars file could be having both the disks PV of that VG, and also the cache disk [1] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1721451
Verified with cockpit-ovirt-dashboard-0.13.6 LVM cache code takes care of the problem now. When the cache is created on 'sdc' to cache the contents of thinpool on 'sdb', then the cache value in the generated vars file becomes - '/dev/sdb,/dev/sdc' as per expectation
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