Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.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 2391529

Summary:	[IBM_Support] RGW returns false success [Code 200] when setting "rateLimit" using storage router endpoint
Product:	[Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Ceph Storage	Reporter:	Shantanu Bhardwaj <shabhard>
Component:	RGW	Assignee:	Matt Benjamin (redhat) <mbenjamin>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	sohan singh <sohsingh>
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:	Rivka Pollack <rpollack>
Priority:	high
Version:	7.1	CC:	ceph-eng-bugs, cephqe-warriors, kjosy, mkogan, pchikhal, pdhange, rpollack
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	9.0
Hardware:	All
OS:	All
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	ceph-19.2.1-272	Doc Type:	No Doc Update
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2026-01-29 06:58:04 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:

Description Shantanu Bhardwaj 2025-08-28 18:22:32 UTC

Description of problem:
When configuring rateLimit to a user attempted via router endpoint, the RGW returns 200, although it has actually not been set when checked with radosgw-admin command .

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
18.2.1-229.el9cp [IBM Ceph 7.1z1]

How reproducible:
Always in Customer's environment.


Actual results:
rateLimit for the user are not getting set

Expected results:
rateLimit for the user should get set.

Comment 15 errata-xmlrpc 2026-01-29 06:58:04 UTC

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 (Moderate: Red Hat Ceph Storage 9.0 Security and Enhancement update), 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/RHSA-2026:1536