I would try as much as possible to have it merged into 4.14. Considering that it is not simple to map all the garbage snapshots on secondary storage.
The proposed PR [1] should, in theory, fix also for XenServer. However, I did not test it for XenServer so far. Today I am deploying a XenServer cluster to check it. If someone else could also hammer that PR and see if it works fine would be great :-) [1] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/3649 Em seg., 3 de fev. de 2020 às 14:02, Paul Angus <paul.an...@shapeblue.com> escreveu: > Thanks. My vote would be that it is a blocker, as there is no way to > clean up and so storage filling up and crashing is a very real possibility. > > > paul.an...@shapeblue.com > www.shapeblue.com > Amadeus House, Floral Street, London WC2E 9DPUK > @shapeblue > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Andrija Panic <andrija.pa...@gmail.com> > Sent: 03 February 2020 16:58 > To: dev <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] blocker issue 3646 for 4.14/4.13.1 > > I believe not - i.e. you can go and delete the files manually (but in some > cases there is also records not properly removed from the > snapshots_store_ref, for either primary or secondary kind, which makes it > more complicated...) > > I can see Simon has asked his colleague to check it (comments on PR) - > fingers crossed. > > On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 at 17:37, Paul Angus <paul.an...@shapeblue.com> wrote: > > > Is there any kind of workaround or way to 'force' snapshots to be > > cleaned up (that doesn't create inconsistencies in CloudStack's view > > of the world vs the physical world? > > > > paul.an...@shapeblue.com > > www.shapeblue.com > > Amadeus House, Floral Street, London WC2E 9DPUK @shapeblue > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Andrija Panic <andrija.pa...@gmail.com> > > Sent: 03 February 2020 16:35 > > To: dev <dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] blocker issue 3646 for 4.14/4.13.1 > > > > This issue is here from before (i.e. not new to 4.14), so we can argue > > it's not technically a blocker due to regression happening in some > previous > > release, and I can live with it being moved to 4.15. > > > > That being said, would be great to see it solved if this rings any bells > > for anyone who might have played with the related code... > > > > On Mon, 3 Feb 2020 at 13:21, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > People, > > > A ticket has been raised as a blocker but i don't think anybody here > > > has the resources to fix it. It is a regression of kinds, and a known > > > issue but in my not so humble opinion won't block anybody from using a > > > future release. The Issue [1] describes the problem and a PR [2] gives > > > a partial solution. It is known to work for a KVM/Ceph environment and > > > thus might be to specific. > > > > > > I move that we either > > > 1. find the PR that caused this and revert it, and/or 2. postpone > > > fixing it till after 4.14 (unless someone has the resources and > > > volunteers to address it) and as an ugly workaround (creating a cron > > > job for your env that deletes stale images) exists, unmark it as > > > blocker. > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/issues/3646 > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/3649 > > > > > > any comments, please? > > > -- > > > Daan > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Andrija Panić > > > > > -- > > Andrija Panić >
