Re: [ovirt-users] Concerns with increasing vdsTimeout value on engine?

On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 5:57 AM, Shubhendu Tripathi <shtripat(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > On 07/12/2015 09:53 PM, Omer Frenkel wrote: >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Liron Aravot" <laravot(a)redhat.com&gt; >>> To: "Ryan Groten" <Ryan.Groten(a)stantec.com&gt; >>> Cc: users(a)ovirt.org >>> Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2015 5:44:28 PM >>> Subject: Re: [ovirt-users] Concerns with increasing vdsTimeout >>> value on engine? >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Ryan Groten" <Ryan.Groten(a)stantec.com&gt; >>>> To: users(a)ovirt.org >>>> Sent: Friday, July 10, 2015 10:45:11 PM >>>> Subject: [ovirt-users] Concerns with increasing vdsTimeout value >>>> on engine? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> When I try to attach new direct lun disks, the scan takes a very >>>> long time to complete because of the number of pvs presented to my >>>> hosts (there is already a bug on this, related to the pvcreate >>>> command taking a very long time - >>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1217401 ) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I discovered a workaround by setting the vdsTimeout value higher >>>> (it is >>>> 180 >>>> seconds by default). I changed it to 300 seconds and now the >>>> direct lun scan returns properly, but I’m hoping someone can warn >>>> me if this workaround is safe or if it’ll cause other potential >>>> issues? I made this change yesterday and so far so good. >>>> >>> Hi, no serious issue can be caused by that. >>> Keep in mind though that any other operation will have that amount >>> of time to complete before failing on timeout - which will cause >>> delays before failing (as the timeout was increased for all >>> executions) >>> when not everything is operational and up as expected (as in most >>> of the time). >>> I'd guess that a RFE could be opened to allow increasing the >>> timeout of specific operations if a user want to do that. >>> >>> thanks, >>> Liron. >> if you have HA vms and use power management (fencing), this might >> cause longer downtime for HA vms if host has network timeouts: >> the engine will wait for 3 network failures before trying to fence >> the host, so in case of timeouts, and increasing it to 5mins, you >> should expect 15mins before engine will decide host is >> non-responsive and fence, so if you have HA vm on this host, this >> will be the vm downtime as well, as the engine will restart HA vms >> only after fencing. >> >> you can read more on >> http://www.ovirt.org/Automatic_Fencing > > Even I am in a need where, I try to delete all the 256 gluster volume > snapshots using a single gluster CLI command, and engine gets timed out. > So, as Liron suggested it would be better if at VDSM verb level we > are able to set timeout. That would be better option and caller needs > to use the feature judicially :) > Please open a RFE for being able to set operation timeout for single command call with description of use cases for which you would like to set the timeout.

>>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Ryan >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Users mailing list >>>> Users(a)ovirt.org >>>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Users mailing list >>> Users(a)ovirt.org >>> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Users mailing list >> Users(a)ovirt.org >> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users > > _______________________________________________ > Users mailing list > Users(a)ovirt.org > http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users