[Users] ovirt-node trying to use NFS4
iheim at redhat.com
Mon Apr 16 13:01:31 EDT 2012
On 04/16/2012 06:20 PM, Mike Burns wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-04-16 at 18:13 +0300, Yaniv Kaul wrote:
>> On 04/16/2012 06:09 PM, Mike Burns wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2012-04-13 at 16:12 -0400, Ian Levesque wrote:
>>>> Hi Juan,
>>>> On Apr 13, 2012, at 2:57 PM, Juan Hernandez wrote:
>>>>> On 04/13/2012 07:20 PM, Ian Levesque wrote:
>>>>>> I'm in the early stages of testing an ovirt install, using the
>>>> official ovirt engine packages + F16.
>>>>>> I configured a storage domain to connect to our gluster storage via
>>>> NFS (pity we can't use gluster natively yet). On the engine server, I
>>>> added Nfsvers=3 to /etc/nfsmount.conf as instructed here:
>>>>>> I then installed a host via ovirt-node (2.3.0-1) and successfully
>>>> added the host, but it refuses to connect to our storage domain
>>>> because it's attempting to mount via NFS4. When I add Nfsvers=3
>>>> to /etc/nfsmount.conf on the host, it comes to life. Of course, that
>>>> will be reset after a reboot.
>>>>>> So what are my options here, other than not use ovirt-node? AFAIK,
>>>> gluster doesn't export NFS4, let alone have options to disable it. And
>>>> I don't see any way to add nfs mount options when defining a storage
>>>>> Take a look at the /etc/vdsm/vdsm.conf configuration file in the
>>>>> There is a nfs_mount_options parameter there that you can use.
>>>> This worked perfectly - thanks for your help (and for pointing me at
>>>> the persistent /config directory).
>>> This issue should be filed as a bug against either engine or vdsm (or
>>> perhaps both). An interface to set nfs options needs to be provided
>>> through either the engine admin UI or through vdsm in some other way.
>>> Manually editing and persisting files is ok as a workaround, but should
>>> not be recommended or used long term.
>> Isn't that what http://www.ovirt.org/wiki/Features/AdvancedNfsOptions
>> all about ?
> Reading that, looks like it's geared toward I/O timeouts, but could
> certainly be used for the other options. I wasn't aware of the feature
> My point was simply that we shouldn't be use edit/persist long term for
> issues like this. There needs to be either a bug or feature filed so
> that we solve it long term.
well, for anything fancy, this can be used:
but if we have an issue with NFS, i agree with need to solve it without
More information about the Users