Bug 1837239 - Issue with memoryMB validation
Summary: Issue with memoryMB validation
Alias: None
Product: OpenShift Container Platform
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Installer
Version: 4.5
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
: 4.5.z
Assignee: Gal Zaidman
QA Contact: Lucie Leistnerova
Depends On: 1841381
Blocks: 1837241
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2020-05-19 07:17 UTC by Jan Zmeskal
Modified: 2020-10-26 17:44 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
: 1837241 1841381 (view as bug list)
Last Closed: 2020-10-26 17:44:57 UTC
Target Upstream Version:

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Jan Zmeskal 2020-05-19 07:17:29 UTC
Description of problem:
Some validations for OpenShift on RHV nodes don't seem to be working as expected. Namely they are:
- memory of VM
- VM type

For more info, see here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1820300#c9

Version-Release number of the following components:

How reproducible:
100 %

Steps to Reproduce:
1. openshift install create install-config
2. Set value of VM's memory to 0
3. Set VM type to an arbitrary string that's neither "desktop", "server" or "high_performance"

Actual results:
Installer accepts both of these customization

Expected results:
Installer should fail early with a helpful error message

Comment 1 Roy Golan 2020-05-20 11:37:12 UTC
Please attach your install-config.yaml

Comment 2 Roy Golan 2020-05-20 11:39:48 UTC
could it be that you are not using 'vmType: xxxx' but other key name, like 'type: xxxx' ?

Comment 3 Jan Zmeskal 2020-05-20 12:57:01 UTC
Roy, I re-tested and you are right - I indeed had a typo in vmType attribute. So yes, vmType validation works as expected. Therefore basically this whole BZ comes down to fixing the memoryMB validation.

Comment 7 Sandro Bonazzola 2020-06-18 06:51:07 UTC
due to capacity constraints we will be revisiting this bug in the upcoming sprint

Comment 9 Gal Zaidman 2020-08-25 06:56:00 UTC
We are working on higher priority feature development and bug fixes. Hence moving this to next sprint.

Comment 10 Sandro Bonazzola 2020-10-22 11:32:56 UTC
due to capacity constraints we will be revisiting this bug in the upcoming sprint

Comment 11 Gal Zaidman 2020-10-26 17:44:57 UTC
We will not port this change into 4.5 release

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