7:54 a.m.
On 2/6/20 1:44 PM, Amit Bawer wrote:
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 1:07 PM Jorick Astrego <jorick(a)netbulae.eu
<mailto:jorick@netbulae.eu>> wrote:
Here you go, this is from the activation I just did a couple of
minutes ago.
I was hoping to see how it was first connected to host, but it doesn't
go that far back. Anyway, the storage domain type is set from engine
and vdsm never try to guess it as far as I saw.
I put the host in maintenance and activated it again, this should give
you some more info. See attached log.
Could you query the engine db about the misbehaving domain and paste
the results?
# su - postgres
Last login: Thu Feb 6 07:17:52 EST 2020 on pts/0
-bash-4.2$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/rh/rh-postgresql10/root/lib64/
/opt/rh/rh-postgresql10/root/usr/bin/psql engine
psql (10.6)
Type "help" for help.
engine=# select * from storage_domain_static where id =
'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9' ;
engine=# select * from storage_domain_static where id =
'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9' ;
id |
storage | storage_name | storage_domain_type |
storage_type | storage_domain_format_type |
_create_date | _update_date | recoverable | la
st_time_used_as_master | storage_description | storage_comment |
wipe_after_delete | warning_low_space_indicator |
critical_space_action_blocker | first_metadata_device |
vg_metadata_device | discard_after_delete | backup | warning_low_co
nfirmed_space_indicator | block_size
--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+--------------+---------------------+--------------+----------------------------+-------------------------------+-----------------------------+-------------+---
-----------------------+---------------------+-----------------+-------------------+-----------------------------+-------------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+----------------------+--------+---------------
------------------------+------------
f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9 |
b8b456f0-27c3-49b9-b5e9-9fa81fb3cdaa | backupnfs
| 1 | 1 | 4 |
2018-01-19 13:31:25.899738+01 | 2019-02-14 14:36:22.3171+01 |
t |
1530772724454 | | |
f | 10
| 5 |
| | f | f |
0 | 512
(1 row)
Regards,
Jorick
On 2/6/20 11:23 AM, Amit Bawer wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 11:07 AM Jorick Astrego
> <jorick(a)netbulae.eu <mailto:jorick@netbulae.eu>> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Something weird is going on with our ovirt node 4.3.8 install
> mounting a nfs share.
>
> We have a NFS domain for a couple of backup disks and we have
> a couple of 4.2 nodes connected to it.
>
> Now I'm adding a fresh cluster of 4.3.8 nodes and the
> backupnfs mount doesn't work.
>
> (annoying you cannot copy the text from the events view)
>
> The domain is up and working
>
> ID:f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9
> Size:10238 GiB
> Available:2491 GiB
> Used:7747 GiB
> Allocated:3302 GiB
> Over Allocation Ratio:37%
> Images:7
> Path:*.*.*.*:/data/ovirt
> NFS Version:AUTO
> Warning Low Space Indicator:10% (1023 GiB)
> Critical Space Action Blocker:5 GiB
>
> But somehow the node appears to thin thinks it's an LVM
> volume? It tries to find the VGs volume group but fails...
> which is not so strange as it is an NFS volume:
>
>
> Could you provide full vdsm.log file with this flow?
>
>
> 2020-02-05 14:17:54,190+0000 WARN (monitor/f5d2f7c)
> [storage.LVM] Reloading VGs failed
> (vgs=[u'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9'] rc=5
> out=[] err=[' Volume group
> "f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9" not found', '
> Cannot process volume group
> f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9']) (lvm:470)
> 2020-02-05 14:17:54,201+0000 ERROR (monitor/f5d2f7c)
> [storage.Monitor] Setting up monitor for
> f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9 failed (monitor:330)
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py",
> line 327, in _setupLoop
> self._setupMonitor()
> File
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py",
> line 349, in _setupMonitor
> self._produceDomain()
> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/utils.py",
> line 159, in wrapper
> value = meth(self, *a, **kw)
> File
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py",
> line 367, in _produceDomain
> self.domain = sdCache.produce(self.sdUUID)
> File
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py",
> line 110, in produce
> domain.getRealDomain()
> File
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py",
> line 51, in getRealDomain
> return self._cache._realProduce(self._sdUUID)
> File
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py",
> line 134, in _realProduce
> domain = self._findDomain(sdUUID)
> File
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py",
> line 151, in _findDomain
> return findMethod(sdUUID)
> File
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py",
> line 176, in _findUnfetchedDomain
> raise se.StorageDomainDoesNotExist(sdUUID)
> StorageDomainDoesNotExist: Storage domain does not exist:
> (u'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9',)
>
> The volume is actually mounted fine on the node:
>
> On NFS server
>
> Feb 5 15:47:09 back1en rpc.mountd[4899]: authenticated
> mount request from *.*.*.*:673 for /data/ovirt (/data/ovirt)
>
> On the host
>
> mount|grep nfs
>
> *.*.*.*:/data/ovirt on
> /rhev/data-center/mnt/*.*.*.*:_data_ovirt type nfs
>
(rw,relatime,vers=3,rsize=1048576,wsize=1048576,namlen=255,soft,nolock,nosharecache,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=6,sec=sys,mountaddr=*.*.*.*,mountvers=3,mountport=20048,mountproto=udp,local_lock=all,addr=*.*.*.*)
>
> And I can see the files:
>
> ls -alrt /rhev/data-center/mnt/*.*.*.*:_data_ovirt
> total 4
> drwxr-xr-x. 5 vdsm kvm 61 Oct 26 2016
> 1ed0a635-67ee-4255-aad9-b70822350706
> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 vdsm kvm 0 Feb 5 14:37 __DIRECT_IO_TEST__
> drwxrwxrwx. 3 root root 86 Feb 5 14:37 .
> drwxr-xr-x. 5 vdsm kvm 4096 Feb 5 14:37 ..
>
>
>
>
>
> Met vriendelijke groet, With kind regards,
>
> Jorick Astrego
> *
> Netbulae Virtualization Experts *
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Tel: 053 20 30 270 info(a)netbulae.eu
> <mailto:info@netbulae.eu> Staalsteden 4-3A KvK 08198180
> Fax: 053 20 30 271 www.netbulae.eu <http://www.netbulae.eu>
> 7547 TA Enschede BTW NL821234584B01
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list -- users(a)ovirt.org <mailto:users@ovirt.org>
> To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)ovirt.org
> <mailto:users-leave@ovirt.org>
> Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/site/privacy-policy/
> oVirt Code of Conduct:
> https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
> List Archives:
>
https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/users@ovirt.org/message/IFTO5WBLVLG...
>
Met vriendelijke groet, With kind regards,
Jorick Astrego
*
Netbulae Virtualization Experts *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tel: 053 20 30 270 info(a)netbulae.eu <mailto:info@netbulae.eu>
Staalsteden 4-3A KvK 08198180
Fax: 053 20 30 271 www.netbulae.eu <http://www.netbulae.eu> 7547
TA Enschede BTW NL821234584B01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Met vriendelijke groet, With kind regards,
Jorick Astrego
Netbulae Virtualization Experts
----------------
Tel: 053 20 30 270 info(a)netbulae.eu Staalsteden 4-3A KvK 08198180
Fax: 053 20 30 271 www.netbulae.eu 7547 TA Enschede BTW NL821234584B01
----------------
12:22 p.m.
New subject: issue connecting 4.3.8 node to nfs domain
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 2:54 PM Jorick Astrego <jorick(a)netbulae.eu> wrote:
On 2/6/20 1:44 PM, Amit Bawer wrote:
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 1:07 PM Jorick Astrego <jorick(a)netbulae.eu> wrote:
> Here you go, this is from the activation I just did a couple of minutes
> ago.
>
I was hoping to see how it was first connected to host, but it doesn't go
that far back. Anyway, the storage domain type is set from engine and vdsm
never try to guess it as far as I saw.
I put the host in maintenance and activated it again, this should give you
some more info. See attached log.
Could you query the engine db about the misbehaving domain and paste the
results?
# su - postgres
Last login: Thu Feb 6 07:17:52 EST 2020 on pts/0
-bash-4.2$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/rh/rh-postgresql10/root/lib64/
/opt/rh/rh-postgresql10/root/usr/bin/psql engine
psql (10.6)
Type "help" for help.
engine=# select * from storage_domain_static where id = '
f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9' ;
engine=# select * from storage_domain_static where id =
'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9' ;
id |
storage | storage_name | storage_domain_type | storage_type
| storage_domain_format_type | _create_date |
_update_date | recoverable | la
st_time_used_as_master | storage_description | storage_comment |
wipe_after_delete | warning_low_space_indicator |
critical_space_action_blocker | first_metadata_device | vg_metadata_device
| discard_after_delete | backup | warning_low_co
nfirmed_space_indicator | block_size
--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+--------------+---------------------+--------------+----------------------------+-------------------------------+-----------------------------+-------------+---
-----------------------+---------------------+-----------------+-------------------+-----------------------------+-------------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+----------------------+--------+---------------
------------------------+------------
f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9 |
b8b456f0-27c3-49b9-b5e9-9fa81fb3cdaa | backupnfs | 1
| 1 | 4 | 2018-01-19 13:31:25.899738+01
| 2019-02-14 14:36:22.3171+01 | t |
1530772724454 | | |
f | 10
| 5 |
| | f | f |
0 | 512
(1 row)
Thanks for sharing,
The storage_type in db is indeed NFS (1), storage_domain_format_type is 4 -
for ovirt 4.3 the storage_domain_format_type is 5 by default and usually
datacenter upgrade is required for 4.2 to 4.3 migration, which not sure if
possible in your current setup since you have 4.2 nodes using this storage
as well.
Regarding the repeating monitor failure for the SD:
2020-02-05 14:17:54,190+0000 WARN (monitor/f5d2f7c) [storage.LVM]
Reloading VGs failed (vgs=[u'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9'] rc=5
out=[] err=[' Volume group "f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9" not
found', ' Cannot process volume group
f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9']) (lvm:470)
This error means that the monitor has tried to query the SD as a VG first
and failed, this is expected for the fallback code called for finding a
domain missing from SD cache:
def _findUnfetchedDomain(self, sdUUID):
...
for mod in (blockSD, glusterSD, localFsSD, nfsSD):
try:
return mod.findDomain(sdUUID)
except se.StorageDomainDoesNotExist:
pass
except Exception:
self.log.error(
"Error while looking for domain `%s`",
sdUUID, exc_info=True)
raise se.StorageDomainDoesNotExist(sdUUID)
2020-02-05 14:17:54,201+0000 ERROR (monitor/f5d2f7c) [storage.Monitor]
Setting up monitor for f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9 failed
(monitor:330)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py", line
327, in _setupLoop
self._setupMonitor()
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py", line
349, in _setupMonitor
self._produceDomain()
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/utils.py", line 159, in
wrapper
value = meth(self, *a, **kw)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py", line
367, in _produceDomain
self.domain = sdCache.produce(self.sdUUID)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line 110, in
produce
domain.getRealDomain()
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line 51, in
getRealDomain
return self._cache._realProduce(self._sdUUID)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line 134, in
_realProduce
domain = self._findDomain(sdUUID)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line 151, in
_findDomain
return findMethod(sdUUID)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line 176, in
_findUnfetchedDomain
raise se.StorageDomainDoesNotExist(sdUUID)
StorageDomainDoesNotExist: Storage domain does not exist:
(u'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9',)
This error part means it failed to query the domain for any possible type,
either for NFS.
Are you able to create a new NFS storage domain on the same storage server
(but on another export path not to harm the existing one)?
If you do succeed to connect to it from the 4.3 datacenter, it could mean
the v4 format is an issue;
otherwise it could mean there is an issue with a different NFS settings
required for 4.3.
Regards,
Jorick
> On 2/6/20 11:23 AM, Amit Bawer wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 11:07 AM Jorick Astrego <jorick(a)netbulae.eu>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Something weird is going on with our ovirt node 4.3.8 install mounting a
>> nfs share.
>>
>> We have a NFS domain for a couple of backup disks and we have a couple
>> of 4.2 nodes connected to it.
>>
>> Now I'm adding a fresh cluster of 4.3.8 nodes and the backupnfs mount
>> doesn't work.
>>
>> (annoying you cannot copy the text from the events view)
>>
>> The domain is up and working
>>
>> ID:f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9
>> Size: 10238 GiB
>> Available:2491 GiB
>> Used:7747 GiB
>> Allocated: 3302 GiB
>> Over Allocation Ratio:37%
>> Images:7
>> Path:*.*.*.*:/data/ovirt
>> NFS Version: AUTO
>> Warning Low Space Indicator:10% (1023 GiB)
>> Critical Space Action Blocker:5 GiB
>>
>> But somehow the node appears to thin thinks it's an LVM volume? It tries
>> to find the VGs volume group but fails... which is not so strange as it is
>> an NFS volume:
>>
>
> Could you provide full vdsm.log file with this flow?
>
>
>> 2020-02-05 14:17:54,190+0000 WARN (monitor/f5d2f7c) [storage.LVM]
>> Reloading VGs failed (vgs=[u'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9'] rc=5
>> out=[] err=[' Volume group "f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9"
not
>> found', ' Cannot process volume group
>> f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9']) (lvm:470)
>> 2020-02-05 14:17:54,201+0000 ERROR (monitor/f5d2f7c) [storage.Monitor]
>> Setting up monitor for f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9 failed
>> (monitor:330)
>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py",
line
>> 327, in _setupLoop
>> self._setupMonitor()
>> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py",
line
>> 349, in _setupMonitor
>> self._produceDomain()
>> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/utils.py", line 159, in
>> wrapper
>> value = meth(self, *a, **kw)
>> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py",
line
>> 367, in _produceDomain
>> self.domain = sdCache.produce(self.sdUUID)
>> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line
110,
>> in produce
>> domain.getRealDomain()
>> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line
51,
>> in getRealDomain
>> return self._cache._realProduce(self._sdUUID)
>> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line
134,
>> in _realProduce
>> domain = self._findDomain(sdUUID)
>> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line
151,
>> in _findDomain
>> return findMethod(sdUUID)
>> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line
176,
>> in _findUnfetchedDomain
>> raise se.StorageDomainDoesNotExist(sdUUID)
>> StorageDomainDoesNotExist: Storage domain does not exist:
>> (u'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9',)
>>
>> The volume is actually mounted fine on the node:
>>
>> On NFS server
>>
>> Feb 5 15:47:09 back1en rpc.mountd[4899]: authenticated mount request
>> from *.*.*.*:673 for /data/ovirt (/data/ovirt)
>>
>> On the host
>>
>> mount|grep nfs
>>
>> *.*.*.*:/data/ovirt on /rhev/data-center/mnt/*.*.*.*:_data_ovirt type
>> nfs
>>
(rw,relatime,vers=3,rsize=1048576,wsize=1048576,namlen=255,soft,nolock,nosharecache,proto=tcp,timeo=600,retrans=6,sec=sys,mountaddr=*.*.*.*,mountvers=3,mountport=20048,mountproto=udp,local_lock=all,addr=*.*.*.*)
>>
>> And I can see the files:
>>
>> ls -alrt /rhev/data-center/mnt/*.*.*.*:_data_ovirt
>> total 4
>> drwxr-xr-x. 5 vdsm kvm 61 Oct 26 2016
>> 1ed0a635-67ee-4255-aad9-b70822350706
>> -rwxr-xr-x. 1 vdsm kvm 0 Feb 5 14:37 __DIRECT_IO_TEST__
>> drwxrwxrwx. 3 root root 86 Feb 5 14:37 .
>> drwxr-xr-x. 5 vdsm kvm 4096 Feb 5 14:37 ..
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Met vriendelijke groet, With kind regards,
>>
>> Jorick Astrego
>>
>> * Netbulae Virtualization Experts *
>> ------------------------------
>> Tel: 053 20 30 270 info(a)netbulae.eu Staalsteden 4-3A KvK 08198180
>> Fax: 053 20 30 271 www.netbulae.eu 7547 TA Enschede BTW NL821234584B01
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Users mailing list -- users(a)ovirt.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave(a)ovirt.org
>> Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/site/privacy-policy/
>> oVirt Code of Conduct:
>> https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
>> List Archives:
>>
https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/users@ovirt.org/message/IFTO5WBLVLG...
>>
>
>
>
>
> Met vriendelijke groet, With kind regards,
>
> Jorick Astrego
>
> * Netbulae Virtualization Experts *
> ------------------------------
> Tel: 053 20 30 270 info(a)netbulae.eu Staalsteden 4-3A KvK 08198180
> Fax: 053 20 30 271 www.netbulae.eu 7547 TA Enschede BTW NL821234584B01
> ------------------------------
>
>
Met vriendelijke groet, With kind regards,
Jorick Astrego
*Netbulae Virtualization Experts *
------------------------------
Tel: 053 20 30 270 info(a)netbulae.eu Staalsteden 4-3A KvK 08198180
Fax: 053 20 30 271 www.netbulae.eu 7547 TA Enschede BTW NL821234584B01
------------------------------
5:25 a.m.
New subject: issue connecting 4.3.8 node to nfs domain
On 2/6/20 6:22 PM, Amit Bawer wrote:
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 2:54 PM Jorick Astrego <jorick(a)netbulae.eu
<mailto:jorick@netbulae.eu>> wrote:
On 2/6/20 1:44 PM, Amit Bawer wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 1:07 PM Jorick Astrego <jorick(a)netbulae.eu
> <mailto:jorick@netbulae.eu>> wrote:
>
> Here you go, this is from the activation I just did a couple
> of minutes ago.
>
> I was hoping to see how it was first connected to host, but it
> doesn't go that far back. Anyway, the storage domain type is set
> from engine and vdsm never try to guess it as far as I saw.
I put the host in maintenance and activated it again, this should
give you some more info. See attached log.
> Could you query the engine db about the misbehaving domain and
> paste the results?
>
> # su - postgres
> Last login: Thu Feb 6 07:17:52 EST 2020 on pts/0
> -bash-4.2$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/rh/rh-postgresql10/root/lib64/
> /opt/rh/rh-postgresql10/root/usr/bin/psql engine
> psql (10.6)
> Type "help" for help.
> engine=# select * from storage_domain_static where id =
> 'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9' ;
engine=# select * from storage_domain_static where id =
'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9' ;
id |
storage | storage_name | storage_domain_type |
storage_type | storage_domain_format_type |
_create_date | _update_date |
recoverable | la
st_time_used_as_master | storage_description | storage_comment
| wipe_after_delete | warning_low_space_indicator |
critical_space_action_blocker | first_metadata_device |
vg_metadata_device | discard_after_delete | backup |
warning_low_co
nfirmed_space_indicator | block_size
--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+--------------+---------------------+--------------+----------------------------+-------------------------------+-----------------------------+-------------+---
-----------------------+---------------------+-----------------+-------------------+-----------------------------+-------------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+----------------------+--------+---------------
------------------------+------------
f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9 |
b8b456f0-27c3-49b9-b5e9-9fa81fb3cdaa | backupnfs
| 1 | 1 |
4 | 2018-01-19 13:31:25.899738+01 |
2019-02-14 14:36:22.3171+01 | t |
1530772724454 | |
| f | 10
| 5 |
| | f | f
|
0 | 512
(1 row)
Thanks for sharing,
The storage_type in db is indeed NFS (1), storage_domain_format_type
is 4 - for ovirt 4.3 the storage_domain_format_type is 5 by default
and usually datacenter upgrade is required for 4.2 to 4.3 migration,
which not sure if possible in your current setup since you have 4.2
nodes using this storage as well.
Regarding the repeating monitor failure for the SD:
2020-02-05 14:17:54,190+0000 WARN (monitor/f5d2f7c) [storage.LVM]
Reloading VGs failed (vgs=[u'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9']
rc=5 out=[] err=[' Volume group
"f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9" not found', ' Cannot process
volume group f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9']) (lvm:470)
This error means that the monitor has tried to query the SD as a VG
first and failed, this is expected for the fallback code called for
finding a domain missing from SD cache:
def_findUnfetchedDomain(self, sdUUID):
...
formod in(blockSD, glusterSD, localFsSD, nfsSD):
try:
returnmod.findDomain(sdUUID)
exceptse.StorageDomainDoesNotExist:
pass
exceptException:
self.log.error(
"Error while looking for domain `%s`",
sdUUID, exc_info=True)
raisese.StorageDomainDoesNotExist(sdUUID)
2020-02-05 14:17:54,201+0000 ERROR (monitor/f5d2f7c) [storage.Monitor]
Setting up monitor for f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9 failed
(monitor:330)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py",
line 327, in _setupLoop
self._setupMonitor()
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py",
line 349, in _setupMonitor
self._produceDomain()
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/utils.py", line 159, in
wrapper
value = meth(self, *a, **kw)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py",
line 367, in _produceDomain
self.domain = sdCache.produce(self.sdUUID)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line
110, in produce
domain.getRealDomain()
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line
51, in getRealDomain
return self._cache._realProduce(self._sdUUID)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line
134, in _realProduce
domain = self._findDomain(sdUUID)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line
151, in _findDomain
return findMethod(sdUUID)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line
176, in _findUnfetchedDomain
raise se.StorageDomainDoesNotExist(sdUUID)
StorageDomainDoesNotExist: Storage domain does not exist:
(u'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9',)
This error part means it failed to query the domain for any possible
type, either for NFS.
Are you able to create a new NFS storage domain on the same storage
server (but on another export path not to harm the existing one)?
If you do succeed to connect to it from the 4.3 datacenter, it could
mean the v4 format is an issue;
otherwise it could mean there is an issue with a different NFS
settings required for 4.3.
Well this will be a problem either way, when I add a new NFS it will not
be storage_domain_format_type 5 as the DC is still on 4.2.
Also when I do add a type 5 nfs domain, the 4.2 nodes will try to mount
it, fail and then become non-responsive taking the whole running cluster
down?
Regards,
Jorick Astrego
Met vriendelijke groet, With kind regards,
Jorick Astrego
Netbulae Virtualization Experts
----------------
Tel: 053 20 30 270 info(a)netbulae.eu Staalsteden 4-3A KvK 08198180
Fax: 053 20 30 271 www.netbulae.eu 7547 TA Enschede BTW NL821234584B01
----------------
5:51 a.m.
New subject: issue connecting 4.3.8 node to nfs domain
I doubt if you can use 4.3.8 nodes with a 4.2 cluster without upgrading it
first. But myabe members of this list could say differently.
On Friday, February 7, 2020, Jorick Astrego <jorick(a)netbulae.eu> wrote:
On 2/6/20 6:22 PM, Amit Bawer wrote:
On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 2:54 PM Jorick Astrego <jorick(a)netbulae.eu> wrote:
>
> On 2/6/20 1:44 PM, Amit Bawer wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 1:07 PM Jorick Astrego <jorick(a)netbulae.eu> wrote:
>
>> Here you go, this is from the activation I just did a couple of minutes
>> ago.
>>
> I was hoping to see how it was first connected to host, but it doesn't go
> that far back. Anyway, the storage domain type is set from engine and vdsm
> never try to guess it as far as I saw.
>
> I put the host in maintenance and activated it again, this should give
> you some more info. See attached log.
>
> Could you query the engine db about the misbehaving domain and paste the
> results?
>
> # su - postgres
> Last login: Thu Feb 6 07:17:52 EST 2020 on pts/0
> -bash-4.2$ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/rh/rh-postgresql10/root/lib64/
> /opt/rh/rh-postgresql10/root/usr/bin/psql engine
> psql (10.6)
> Type "help" for help.
> engine=# select * from storage_domain_static where id = '
> f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9' ;
>
>
> engine=# select * from storage_domain_static where id =
> 'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9' ;
> id |
> storage | storage_name | storage_domain_type | storage_type
> | storage_domain_format_type | _create_date |
> _update_date | recoverable | la
> st_time_used_as_master | storage_description | storage_comment |
> wipe_after_delete | warning_low_space_indicator |
> critical_space_action_blocker | first_metadata_device | vg_metadata_device
> | discard_after_delete | backup | warning_low_co
> nfirmed_space_indicator | block_size
> --------------------------------------+---------------------
> -----------------+--------------+---------------------+-----
> ---------+----------------------------+---------------------
> ----------+-----------------------------+-------------+---
> -----------------------+---------------------+--------------
> ---+-------------------+-----------------------------+------
> -------------------------+-----------------------+----------
> ----------+----------------------+--------+---------------
> ------------------------+------------
> f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9 | b8b456f0-27c3-49b9-b5e9-9fa81fb3cdaa
> | backupnfs | 1 | 1 |
> 4 | 2018-01-19 13:31:25.899738+01 | 2019-02-14
> 14:36:22.3171+01 | t |
> 1530772724454 | | |
> f | 10
> | 5 |
> | | f | f |
> 0 | 512
> (1 row)
>
>
>
Thanks for sharing,
The storage_type in db is indeed NFS (1), storage_domain_format_type is 4
- for ovirt 4.3 the storage_domain_format_type is 5 by default and usually
datacenter upgrade is required for 4.2 to 4.3 migration, which not sure if
possible in your current setup since you have 4.2 nodes using this storage
as well.
Regarding the repeating monitor failure for the SD:
2020-02-05 14:17:54,190+0000 WARN (monitor/f5d2f7c) [storage.LVM]
Reloading VGs failed (vgs=[u'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9'] rc=5
out=[] err=[' Volume group "f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9" not
found', ' Cannot process volume group
f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9'])
(lvm:470)
This error means that the monitor has tried to query the SD as a VG first
and failed, this is expected for the fallback code called for finding a
domain missing from SD cache:
def _findUnfetchedDomain(self, sdUUID):
...
for mod in (blockSD, glusterSD, localFsSD, nfsSD):
try:
return mod.findDomain(sdUUID)
except se.StorageDomainDoesNotExist:
pass
except Exception:
self.log.error(
"Error while looking for domain `%s`",
sdUUID, exc_info=True)
raise se.StorageDomainDoesNotExist(sdUUID)
2020-02-05 14:17:54,201+0000 ERROR (monitor/f5d2f7c) [storage.Monitor]
Setting up monitor for f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9 failed
(monitor:330)
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py", line
327, in _setupLoop
self._setupMonitor()
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py", line
349, in _setupMonitor
self._produceDomain()
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/utils.py", line 159, in
wrapper
value = meth(self, *a, **kw)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py", line
367, in _produceDomain
self.domain = sdCache.produce(self.sdUUID)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line 110,
in produce
domain.getRealDomain()
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line 51,
in getRealDomain
return self._cache._realProduce(self._sdUUID)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line 134,
in _realProduce
domain = self._findDomain(sdUUID)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line 151,
in _findDomain
return findMethod(sdUUID)
File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py", line 176,
in _findUnfetchedDomain
raise se.StorageDomainDoesNotExist(sdUUID)
StorageDomainDoesNotExist: Storage domain does not exist:
(u'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9',)
This error part means it failed to query the domain for any possible type,
either for NFS.
Are you able to create a new NFS storage domain on the same storage server
(but on another export path not to harm the existing one)?
If you do succeed to connect to it from the 4.3 datacenter, it could mean
the v4 format is an issue;
otherwise it could mean there is an issue with a different NFS settings
required for 4.3.
Well this will be a problem either way, when I add a new NFS it will not
be storage_domain_format_type 5 as the DC is still on 4.2.
Also when I do add a type 5 nfs domain, the 4.2 nodes will try to mount
it, fail and then become non-responsive taking the whole running cluster
down?
Regards,
Jorick Astrego
Met vriendelijke groet, With kind regards,
Jorick Astrego
*Netbulae Virtualization Experts *
------------------------------
Tel: 053 20 30 270 info(a)netbulae.eu Staalsteden 4-3A
<https://www.google.com/maps/search/Staalsteden+4-3A?entry=gmail&sourc... KvK
08198180
Fax: 053 20 30 271 www.netbulae.eu 7547 TA Enschede BTW NL821234584B01
------------------------------
6:50 p.m.
New subject: issue connecting 4.3.8 node to nfs domain
Dear Amit.
That is not exactly the issue we're facing; I have two clusters an old
4.2 cluster and a fresh 4.3 cluster. The DC is set to 4.2 because of this.
I wish to bring the 4.3 cluster online and migrate everything to it,
then remove the 4.2 cluster.
This should be a path that can be taken imho.
Otherwise I could upgrade the current 4.2 cluster althought it gets
decomissioned but then I have the same problem with hosts upgraded to
4.3 not being able to connect to the NFS and able to be activated. Until
I upgrade them all and set the cluster and DC to 4.3.
I could detach the NFS domain for a bit, but we use this mount for
backup disks of several VM's and I'd rather not migrate everything in a
hurry or do without these backups for a longer time.
Regards,
Jorick Astrego
On 2/8/20 11:51 AM, Amit Bawer wrote:
I doubt if you can use 4.3.8 nodes with a 4.2 cluster without
upgrading it first. But myabe members of this list could say differently.
On Friday, February 7, 2020, Jorick Astrego <jorick(a)netbulae.eu
<mailto:jorick@netbulae.eu>> wrote:
On 2/6/20 6:22 PM, Amit Bawer wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 2:54 PM Jorick Astrego <jorick(a)netbulae.eu
> <mailto:jorick@netbulae.eu>> wrote:
>
>
> On 2/6/20 1:44 PM, Amit Bawer wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 1:07 PM Jorick Astrego
>> <jorick(a)netbulae.eu <mailto:jorick@netbulae.eu>> wrote:
>>
>> Here you go, this is from the activation I just did a
>> couple of minutes ago.
>>
>> I was hoping to see how it was first connected to host, but
>> it doesn't go that far back. Anyway, the storage domain type
>> is set from engine and vdsm never try to guess it as far as
>> I saw.
>
> I put the host in maintenance and activated it again, this
> should give you some more info. See attached log.
>
>> Could you query the engine db about the misbehaving domain
>> and paste the results?
>>
>> # su - postgres
>> Last login: Thu Feb 6 07:17:52 EST 2020 on pts/0
>> -bash-4.2$
>> LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/opt/rh/rh-postgresql10/root/lib64/
>> /opt/rh/rh-postgresql10/root/usr/bin/psql engine
>> psql (10.6)
>> Type "help" for help.
>> engine=# select * from storage_domain_static where id =
>> 'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9' ;
>
>
> engine=# select * from storage_domain_static where id =
> 'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9' ;
> id |
> storage | storage_name |
> storage_domain_type | storage_type |
> storage_domain_format_type |
> _create_date | _update_date |
> recoverable | la
> st_time_used_as_master | storage_description |
> storage_comment | wipe_after_delete |
> warning_low_space_indicator |
> critical_space_action_blocker | first_metadata_device |
> vg_metadata_device | discard_after_delete | backup |
> warning_low_co
> nfirmed_space_indicator | block_size
>
--------------------------------------+--------------------------------------+--------------+---------------------+--------------+----------------------------+-------------------------------+-----------------------------+-------------+---
>
-----------------------+---------------------+-----------------+-------------------+-----------------------------+-------------------------------+-----------------------+--------------------+----------------------+--------+---------------
> ------------------------+------------
> f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9 |
> b8b456f0-27c3-49b9-b5e9-9fa81fb3cdaa | backupnfs
> | 1 | 1 |
> 4 | 2018-01-19
> 13:31:25.899738+01 | 2019-02-14 14:36:22.3171+01 |
> t |
> 1530772724454 |
> | | f
> | 10
> | 5 |
> | | f | f
> |
> 0 | 512
> (1 row)
>
>
>
> Thanks for sharing,
>
> The storage_type in db is indeed NFS (1),
> storage_domain_format_type is 4 - for ovirt 4.3 the
> storage_domain_format_type is 5 by default and usually datacenter
> upgrade is required for 4.2 to 4.3 migration, which not sure if
> possible in your current setup since you have 4.2 nodes using
> this storage as well.
>
> Regarding the repeating monitor failure for the SD:
>
> 2020-02-05 14:17:54,190+0000 WARN (monitor/f5d2f7c)
> [storage.LVM] Reloading VGs failed
> (vgs=[u'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9'] rc=5 out=[]
> err=[' Volume group "f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9" not
> found', ' Cannot process volume group
> f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9']) (lvm:470)
>
> This error means that the monitor has tried to query the SD as a
> VG first and failed, this is expected for the fallback code
> called for finding a domain missing from SD cache:
>
> def_findUnfetchedDomain(self, sdUUID):
> ...
> formod in(blockSD, glusterSD, localFsSD, nfsSD):
> try:
> returnmod.findDomain(sdUUID)
> exceptse.StorageDomainDoesNotExist:
> pass
> exceptException:
> self.log.error(
> "Error while looking for domain `%s`",
> sdUUID, exc_info=True)
> raisese.StorageDomainDoesNotExist(sdUUID)
>
> 2020-02-05 14:17:54,201+0000 ERROR (monitor/f5d2f7c)
> [storage.Monitor] Setting up monitor for
> f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9 failed (monitor:330)
> Traceback (most recent call last):
> File
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py", line
> 327, in _setupLoop
> self._setupMonitor()
> File
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py", line
> 349, in _setupMonitor
> self._produceDomain()
> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/utils.py", line
> 159, in wrapper
> value = meth(self, *a, **kw)
> File
> "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/monitor.py", line
> 367, in _produceDomain
> self.domain = sdCache.produce(self.sdUUID)
> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py",
> line 110, in produce
> domain.getRealDomain()
> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py",
> line 51, in getRealDomain
> return self._cache._realProduce(self._sdUUID)
> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py",
> line 134, in _realProduce
> domain = self._findDomain(sdUUID)
> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py",
> line 151, in _findDomain
> return findMethod(sdUUID)
> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/vdsm/storage/sdc.py",
> line 176, in _findUnfetchedDomain
> raise se.StorageDomainDoesNotExist(sdUUID)
> StorageDomainDoesNotExist: Storage domain does not exist:
> (u'f5d2f7c6-093f-46d6-a844-224d92db5ef9',)
>
> This error part means it failed to query the domain for any
> possible type, either for NFS.
>
> Are you able to create a new NFS storage domain on the same
> storage server (but on another export path not to harm the
> existing one)?
> If you do succeed to connect to it from the 4.3 datacenter, it
> could mean the v4 format is an issue;
> otherwise it could mean there is an issue with a different NFS
> settings required for 4.3.
Well this will be a problem either way, when I add a new NFS it
will not be storage_domain_format_type 5 as the DC is still on 4.2.
Also when I do add a type 5 nfs domain, the 4.2 nodes will try to
mount it, fail and then become non-responsive taking the whole
running cluster down?
Regards,
Jorick Astrego
Met vriendelijke groet, With kind regards,
Jorick Astrego
*
Netbulae Virtualization Experts *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tel: 053 20 30 270 info(a)netbulae.eu <mailto:info@netbulae.eu>
Staalsteden 4-3A
<https://www.google.com/maps/search/Staalsteden+4-3A?entry=gmail&sourc...
KvK 08198180
Fax: 053 20 30 271 www.netbulae.eu <http://www.netbulae.eu> 7547
TA Enschede BTW NL821234584B01
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Met vriendelijke groet, With kind regards,
Jorick Astrego
Netbulae Virtualization Experts
----------------
Tel: 053 20 30 270 info(a)netbulae.eu Staalsteden 4-3A KvK 08198180
Fax: 053 20 30 271 www.netbulae.eu 7547 TA Enschede BTW NL821234584B01
----------------
1780
days inactive
1782
days old
4 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Amit Bawer -
Jorick Astrego