Skip to content

mgr/cephadm: alias rgw-nfs -> nfs#39825

Merged
sebastian-philipp merged 2 commits intoceph:masterfrom
mgfritch:cephadm-rgw-nfs-health
Mar 8, 2021
Merged

mgr/cephadm: alias rgw-nfs -> nfs#39825
sebastian-philipp merged 2 commits intoceph:masterfrom
mgfritch:cephadm-rgw-nfs-health

Conversation

@mgfritch
Copy link
Contributor

@mgfritch mgfritch commented Mar 3, 2021

RGW will register a daemon_type rgw-nfs which needs to map to
the corresponding cephadm nfs daemon to avoid stray daemon warnings

Fixes: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/49573
Signed-off-by: Michael Fritch mfritch@suse.com

Checklist

  • References tracker ticket
  • Updates documentation if necessary
  • Includes tests for new functionality or reproducer for bug
Show available Jenkins commands
  • jenkins retest this please
  • jenkins test classic perf
  • jenkins test crimson perf
  • jenkins test signed
  • jenkins test make check
  • jenkins test make check arm64
  • jenkins test submodules
  • jenkins test dashboard
  • jenkins test api
  • jenkins test docs
  • jenkins render docs
  • jenkins test ceph-volume all
  • jenkins test ceph-volume tox

@mgfritch
mgr/cephadm: alias rgw-nfs -> nfs
0f23722 
RGW will register a daemon_type `rgw-nfs` which needs to map to
the corresponding cephadm nfs daemon to avoid stray daemon warnings

Fixes: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/49573
Signed-off-by: Michael Fritch <mfritch@suse.com>
@mgfritch mgfritch requested a review from a team as a code owner March 3, 2021 23:16
@sebastian-philipp
Copy link
Contributor

sebastian-philipp commented Mar 3, 2021

is there any way we can verify this in teuthology?

@mgfritch
Copy link
Contributor Author

mgfritch commented Mar 3, 2021

is there any way we can verify this in teuthology?

it would be a somewhat involved test:

  1. deploy rgw
  2. create an rgw bucket
  3. deploy nfs
  4. configure an rgw-nfs export
  5. nfs mount the rgw bucket
  6. ...

@mattbenjamin
Copy link
Contributor

mattbenjamin commented Mar 4, 2021

@mgfritch sorry to be dense, but what happens when we have cephfs and rgw nfs?

@sebastian-philipp
Copy link
Contributor

sebastian-philipp commented Mar 4, 2021

@mgfritch sorry to be dense, but what happens when we have cephfs and rgw nfs?

in a single daemon? no idea. The rgw-nfs part of it will register itself in the service-map as rgw-nfs for sure. but the cephfs part?

@sebastian-philipp
Copy link
Contributor

sebastian-philipp commented Mar 4, 2021

is there any way we can verify this in teuthology?

it would be a somewhat involved test:

  1. deploy rgw

easy: that's already done in the fixed-2 cluster

  1. create an rgw bucket

ok that's the hard part. If we want to have a nice API, we'd need to configure the dashbard first. Otherwise we'd need to do that ourselves. somehow.

  1. deploy nfs

ceph orch apply nfs

  1. configure an rgw-nfs export

the dashboard already has this. sigh.

  1. nfs mount the rgw bucket

is this required?

  1. ...

I hope we don't need anything beyond that.

@mgfritch
Copy link
Contributor Author

mgfritch commented Mar 4, 2021

is there any way we can verify this in teuthology?

  1. create an rgw bucket

ok that's the hard part. If we want to have a nice API, we'd need to configure the dashbard first. Otherwise we'd need to do that ourselves. somehow.

right, the interface changed somewhat between octopus <-> pacific and could likely change again ..

  1. nfs mount the rgw bucket

is this required?

the rgw-nfs service type is not registered by librgw until the first mount has occurred...

  1. ...

I hope we don't need anything beyond that.

I would hope not either ... this is already feels like a long running test for a small feature

@sebastian-philipp
Copy link
Contributor

sebastian-philipp commented Mar 4, 2021

ok let's do the other way around then: enable the rgw team to run their tests with cephadm. and then let's continue from there.

@mgfritch
Copy link
Contributor Author

mgfritch commented Mar 4, 2021

@mgfritch sorry to be dense, but what happens when we have cephfs and rgw nfs?

in a single daemon? no idea. The rgw-nfs part of it will register itself in the service-map as rgw-nfs for sure. but the cephfs part?

@mattbenjamin nfs is configured to allow the mount of both rgw and cephfs from a single daemon ... rgw appears to register a nfs-rgw service type during mount, whereas I'm not seeing similar behavior with cephfs...

I've added additional detail in the tracker

@mgfritch
mgr/cephadm: add CEPHADM_STRAY_DAEMON unittest
88dc552 
Fixes: https://tracker.ceph.com/issues/49573
Signed-off-by: Michael Fritch <mfritch@suse.com>
@mgfritch
Copy link
Contributor Author

mgfritch commented Mar 5, 2021

jenkins test make check

@tchaikov
Copy link
Contributor

tchaikov commented Mar 7, 2021

failures tracked by

@sebastian-philipp sebastian-philipp merged commit 7bc434a into ceph:master Mar 8, 2021
@mgfritch mgfritch mentioned this pull request Mar 10, 2021
Merged
3 tasks
@liewegas liewegas mentioned this pull request Mar 15, 2021
Merged
@Daniel-Pivonka Daniel-Pivonka mentioned this pull request Apr 8, 2021
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@sebastian-philipp sebastian-philipp Awaiting requested review from sebastian-philipp

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

cephadm pybind

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@mgfritch @sebastian-philipp @mattbenjamin @tchaikov