On 23/04/18 01:23 +0300, Elad Ben Aharon wrote:
Hi, I've triggered another execution [1] due to some issues I saw in the first which are not related to the patch.
The success rate is 78% which is low comparing to tier1 executions with code from downstream builds (95-100% success rates) [2].
Could you run the current master (without the dynamic_ownership patch) so that we have viable comparision?
From what I could see so far, there is an issue with move and copy operations to and from Gluster domains. For example [3].
The logs are attached.
[1] *https://rhv-jenkins.rhev-ci-vms.eng.rdu2.redhat.com/job/rhv-4.2-ge-runner-ti... <https://rhv-jenkins.rhev-ci-vms.eng.rdu2.redhat.com/job/rhv-4.2-ge-runner-tier1-after-upgrade/7/testReport/>*
[2] https://rhv-jenkins.rhev-ci-vms.eng.rdu2.redhat.com/job/ rhv-4.2-ge-runner-tier1-after-upgrade/7/
[3] 2018-04-22 13:06:28,316+0300 INFO (jsonrpc/7) [vdsm.api] FINISH deleteImage error=Image does not exist in domain: 'image=cabb8846-7a4b-4244-9835-5f603e682f33, domain=e5fd29c8-52ba-467e-be09-ca40ff054dd4' from=: :ffff:10.35.161.182,40936, flow_id=disks_syncAction_ba6b2630-5976-4935, task_id=3d5f2a8a-881c-409e-93e9-aaa643c10e42 (api:51) 2018-04-22 13:06:28,317+0300 ERROR (jsonrpc/7) [storage.TaskManager.Task] (Task='3d5f2a8a-881c-409e-93e9-aaa643c10e42') Unexpected error (task:875) Traceback (most recent call last): File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/task.py", line 882, in _run return fn(*args, **kargs) File "<string>", line 2, in deleteImage File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/common/api.py", line 49, in method ret = func(*args, **kwargs) File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/hsm.py", line 1503, in deleteImage raise se.ImageDoesNotExistInSD(imgUUID, sdUUID) ImageDoesNotExistInSD: Image does not exist in domain: 'image=cabb8846-7a4b-4244-9835-5f603e682f33, domain=e5fd29c8-52ba-467e-be09-ca40ff054dd4'
2018-04-22 13:06:28,317+0300 INFO (jsonrpc/7) [storage.TaskManager.Task] (Task='3d5f2a8a-881c-409e-93e9-aaa643c10e42') aborting: Task is aborted: "Image does not exist in domain: 'image=cabb8846-7a4b-4244-9835- 5f603e682f33, domain=e5fd29c8-52ba-467e-be09-ca40ff054dd4'" - code 268 (task:1181) 2018-04-22 13:06:28,318+0300 ERROR (jsonrpc/7) [storage.Dispatcher] FINISH deleteImage error=Image does not exist in domain: 'image=cabb8846-7a4b-4244-9835-5f603e682f33, domain=e5fd29c8-52ba-467e-be09 -ca40ff054d d4' (dispatcher:82)
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 5:34 PM, Elad Ben Aharon <ebenahar@redhat.com> wrote:
Triggered a sanity tier1 execution [1] using [2], which covers all the requested areas, on iSCSI, NFS and Gluster. I'll update with the results.
[1] https://rhv-jenkins.rhev-ci-vms.eng.rdu2.redhat.com/view/4.2 _dev/job/rhv-4.2-ge-flow-storage/1161/
[2] https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/89830/ vdsm-4.30.0-291.git77aef9a.el7.x86_64
On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 3:07 PM, Martin Polednik <mpolednik@redhat.com> wrote:
On 19/04/18 14:54 +0300, Elad Ben Aharon wrote:
Hi Martin,
I see [1] requires a rebase, can you please take care?
Should be rebased.
At the moment, our automation is stable only on iSCSI, NFS, Gluster and
FC. Ceph is not supported and Cinder will be stabilized soon, AFAIR, it's not stable enough at the moment.
That is still pretty good.
[1] https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/89830/
Thanks
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Martin Polednik <mpolednik@redhat.com> wrote:
On 18/04/18 11:37 +0300, Elad Ben Aharon wrote:
Hi, sorry if I misunderstood, I waited for more input regarding what
areas have to be tested here.
I'd say that you have quite a bit of freedom in this regard. GlusterFS should be covered by Dennis, so iSCSI/NFS/ceph/cinder with some suite that covers basic operations (start & stop VM, migrate it), snapshots and merging them, and whatever else would be important for storage sanity.
mpolednik
On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 11:16 AM, Martin Polednik <mpolednik@redhat.com
wrote:
On 11/04/18 16:52 +0300, Elad Ben Aharon wrote:
> > We can test this on iSCSI, NFS and GlusterFS. As for ceph and cinder, > >> will >> have to check, since usually, we don't execute our automation on >> them. >> >> >> Any update on this? I believe the gluster tests were successful, OST > passes fine and unit tests pass fine, that makes the storage backends > test the last required piece. > > > On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 4:38 PM, Raz Tamir <ratamir@redhat.com> > wrote: > > >> +Elad >> >> >>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 4:28 PM, Dan Kenigsberg <danken@redhat.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:34 PM, Nir Soffer <nsoffer@redhat.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 12:31 PM Eyal Edri <eedri@redhat.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Please make sure to run as much OST suites on this patch as >>>>> possible >>>>> >>>>> before merging ( using 'ci please build' ) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> But note that OST is not a way to verify the patch. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Such changes require testing with all storage types we support. >>>>> >>>>> Nir >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 4:09 PM, Martin Polednik < >>>>> mpolednik@redhat.com >>>>> > >>>>> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hey, >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> I've created a patch[0] that is finally able to activate >>>>>>> libvirt's >>>>>>> dynamic_ownership for VDSM while not negatively affecting >>>>>>> functionality of our storage code. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That of course comes with quite a bit of code removal, mostly in >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> area of host devices, hwrng and anything that touches devices; >>>>>>> bunch >>>>>>> of test changes and one XML generation caveat (storage is >>>>>>> handled >>>>>>> by >>>>>>> VDSM, therefore disk relabelling needs to be disabled on the >>>>>>> VDSM >>>>>>> level). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Because of the scope of the patch, I welcome >>>>>>> storage/virt/network >>>>>>> people to review the code and consider the implication this >>>>>>> change >>>>>>> has >>>>>>> on current/future features. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [0] https://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/89830/ >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In particular: dynamic_ownership was set to 0 prehistorically >>>>>>> (as >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> part >>>>> >>>> of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=554961 ) because >>>> libvirt, >>>> running as root, was not able to play properly with root-squash nfs >>>> mounts. >>>> >>>> Have you attempted this use case? >>>> >>>> I join to Nir's request to run this with storage QE. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> Raz Tamir >>> Manager, RHV QE >>> >>> >>> >>>