Bug 876474 - [RHEV-RHS]: Unable to create VM with the same name for which the VM creation was unsuccessful earlier
Summary: [RHEV-RHS]: Unable to create VM with the same name for which the VM creation ...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Gluster Storage
Classification: Red Hat Storage
Component: glusterfs
Version: 2.0
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Unspecified
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: Vijay Bellur
QA Contact: Sudhir D
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2012-11-14 09:12 UTC by Rahul Hinduja
Modified: 2012-12-18 12:44 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2012-12-18 12:44:27 UTC
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Screen shot of error and list of VM (118.75 KB, image/png)
2012-11-14 09:34 UTC, Rahul Hinduja
no flags Details

Description Rahul Hinduja 2012-11-14 09:12:39 UTC
Description of problem:
=======================

Tried to create a VM with name "VM8". But VM creation is unsuccessful because of reason (Operation add-disk failed to complete, bug #870948), it doesn't list the VM with name VM8. Also no back-end directory or image is created for this VM.

But when again tried to create vm with the same name "VM8" it failed with the error: Cannot add VM. VM with the same name already exists.

Since, the VM creation was failed at the first place, it should allow me to create the VM with the same name.



Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
=============================================================
glusterfs 3.3.0rhsvirt1 built on Oct 28 2012 23:50:59

(glusterfs-3.3.0rhsvirt1-8.el6rhs.x86_64)



Steps Carried:
==============

Initial setup: 2*2 distributed-replicate setup with the following servers:

rhs-client1.lab.eng.blr.redhat.com
rhs-client16.lab.eng.blr.redhat.com
rhs-client17.lab.eng.blr.redhat.com
rhs-client18.lab.eng.blr.redhat.com

1. Powered off rhs-client1.lab.eng.blr.redhat.com and rhs-client17.lab.eng.blr.redhat.com servers
2. Tried to create VM8
3. VM creation was not successful (Hit the bug #870948)
4. Tried to create the VM with same name VM8. It reported error
  
Actual results:
===============

VM creation failed with error: VM can not be add, VM already exists

Expected results:
=================

Since, the VM creation was failed at the first place, it should allow me to create the VM with the same name.

Comment 3 Rahul Hinduja 2012-11-14 09:34:31 UTC
Created attachment 644712 [details]
Screen shot of error and list of VM

Comment 4 Amar Tumballi 2012-11-14 12:23:06 UTC
krutika, while you are at solving volume create 'force' issue... can you have a look on this bug?

Comment 5 Rahul Hinduja 2012-11-15 10:25:51 UTC
For information, VDSM version on client's: vdsm-4.9.6-41.0.el6_3.x86_64

Comment 6 Amar Tumballi 2012-11-16 06:31:37 UTC
Rahul, noticed that here its VM creation which is failing. I was reading it as volume creation failing. Isn't it a normal behavior in case of other storage domain also? I don't think this is an issue at all.

If this is an issue, then it should be ideally be raised with RHEV-M in this case IMO.

Comment 9 Omer Frenkel 2012-12-05 10:10:44 UTC
could it be that 'vm8' was created on a different cluster/dc?
can you please select the 'system' node on the tree on the left and check that this vm really not there?

if the vm is still not showing, and the problem consists:
does this happen always?
please attach relevant engine.log, so it would be possible to understand what the error caused

Comment 10 Vijay Bellur 2012-12-11 13:16:22 UTC
Rahul, Can you please provide the information  requested in comment 9?

Comment 12 Omer Frenkel 2012-12-13 11:55:04 UTC
well from the logs (engine.log) its clear that the vm was created, and then tried to be created again (more than one time):

vm8 creation:

2012-11-14 03:44:07,009 INFO  [org.ovirt.engine.core.bll.AddVmFromScratchCommand] (ajp-/127.0.0.1:8702-16) [3a486ee7] Lock Acquired to object EngineLock [exclusiveLocks= key: vm8 value: VM_NAME
, sharedLocks= ]
2012-11-14 03:44:07,022 INFO  [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IsValidVDSCommand] (ajp-/127.0.0.1:8702-16) [3a486ee7] START, IsValidVDSCommand( storagePoolId = 1eaedbbb-1c0e-4028-9b0e-adac7e07d25f, ignoreFailoverLimit = false, compatabilityVersion = null), log id: cf9701d
2012-11-14 03:44:07,023 INFO  [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IsValidVDSCommand] (ajp-/127.0.0.1:8702-16) [3a486ee7] FINISH, IsValidVDSCommand, return: true, log id: cf9701d
2012-11-14 03:44:07,029 INFO  [org.ovirt.engine.core.bll.AddVmFromScratchCommand] (ajp-/127.0.0.1:8702-16) [3a486ee7] Running command: AddVmFromScratchCommand internal: false. Entities affected :  ID: c04832b4-2976-11e2-b6fb-52540035ed48 Type: VdsGroups
2012-11-14 03:44:07,030 INFO  [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IsValidVDSCommand] (ajp-/127.0.0.1:8702-16) [3a486ee7] START, IsValidVDSCommand( storagePoolId = 1eaedbbb-1c0e-4028-9b0e-adac7e07d25f, ignoreFailoverLimit = false, compatabilityVersion = null), log id: 7bc511ac
2012-11-14 03:44:07,031 INFO  [org.ovirt.engine.core.vdsbroker.irsbroker.IsValidVDSCommand] (ajp-/127.0.0.1:8702-16) [3a486ee7] FINISH, IsValidVDSCommand, return: true, log id: 7bc511ac
2012-11-14 03:44:07,047 INFO  [org.ovirt.engine.core.bll.AddVmFromScratchCommand] (ajp-/127.0.0.1:8702-16) [3a486ee7] Lock freed to object EngineLock [exclusiveLocks= key: vm8 value: VM_NAME


then tried to create again but fails because already exist:
2012-11-14 03:48:26,094 INFO  [org.ovirt.engine.core.bll.AddVmFromScratchCommand] (ajp-/127.0.0.1:8702-17) [3cc769ea] Lock Acquired to object EngineLock [exclusiveLocks= key: vm8 value: VM_NAME
, sharedLocks= ]
2012-11-14 03:48:26,110 WARN  [org.ovirt.engine.core.bll.AddVmFromScratchCommand] (ajp-/127.0.0.1:8702-17) [3cc769ea] CanDoAction of action AddVmFromScratch failed. Reasons:VAR__ACTION__ADD,VAR__TYPE__VM,ACTION_TYPE_FAILED_VM_ALREADY_EXIST
2012-11-14 03:48:26,110 INFO  [org.ovirt.engine.core.bll.AddVmFromScratchCommand] (ajp-/127.0.0.1:8702-17) [3cc769ea] Lock freed to object EngineLock [exclusiveLocks= key: vm8 value: VM_NAME
, sharedLocks= ]


i guess the problem was that the vm didn't show in the view is because the wrong object selected in the tree view on the left.

Comment 13 Vijay Bellur 2012-12-18 12:44:27 UTC
Closing as per comment 12. 

Rahul, Please re-open if observed again.


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