[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4725?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13992940#comment-13992940
]
Nux commented on CLOUDSTACK-4725:
---------------------------------
I think I hit this issue once more, though there is no upgrade involved (so
maybe not exactly the same bug?).
After a `reboot -f` on a all-in-one KVM install v4.3 I get the following in the
logs:
http://fpaste.org/100226/69262139/
# virsh pool-list --all
Name State Autostart
-----------------------------------------
9fef885c-8e6f-45f8-9eeb-b536e7013d83 active no
mysql> select
id,name,uuid,pool_type,data_center_id,pod_id,cluster_id,path,status from
storage_pool;
+----+-----------------------+--------------------------------------+------------+----------------+--------+------------+-------------------------+--------+
| id | name | uuid | pool_type
| data_center_id | pod_id | cluster_id | path | status |
+----+-----------------------+--------------------------------------+------------+----------------+--------+------------+-------------------------+--------+
| 1 | cloud01 Local Storage | 9fef885c-8e6f-45f8-9eeb-b536e7013d83 |
Filesystem | 1 | 1 | 1 | /var/lib/libvirt/images |
Up |
+----+-----------------------+--------------------------------------+------------+----------------+--------+------------+-------------------------+--------+
Any ideas?
> KVM agent fails to join if local pool is already registered
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CLOUDSTACK-4725
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4725
> Project: CloudStack
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: Public(Anyone can view this level - this is the
> default.)
> Components: KVM
> Affects Versions: 4.2.0
> Reporter: Marcus Sorensen
> Assignee: edison su
> Priority: Critical
> Fix For: 4.2.1
>
>
> "Another active pool with the same uuid already exists"
> This might be a regression, I believe we used to catch this case and/or check
> libvirt to see if pool was already established and just return if it is
> already there. Or maybe we only do that for non-local.
> 2013-09-22 23:42:35,265 DEBUG [agent.manager.AgentManagerImpl]
> (AgentConnectTaskPool-396:null) Sending Connect to listener:
> LocalStoragePoolListener
> 2013-09-22 23:42:35,266 DEBUG
> [datastore.lifecycle.CloudStackPrimaryDataStoreLifeCycleImpl]
> (AgentConnectTaskPool-396:null) createPool Params @ scheme - Filesystem
> storageHost - 172.17.10.10 hostPath - /var/lib/libvirt/images port - -1
> 2013-09-22 23:42:35,267 DEBUG
> [datastore.lifecycle.CloudStackPrimaryDataStoreLifeCycleImpl]
> (AgentConnectTaskPool-396:null) Another active pool with the same uuid
> already exists
> 2013-09-22 23:42:35,267 WARN [cloud.storage.StorageManagerImpl]
> (AgentConnectTaskPool-396:null) Unable to setup the local storage pool for
> Host[-1-Routing]
> com.cloud.utils.exception.CloudRuntimeException: Another active pool with the
> same uuid already exists
> at
> org.apache.cloudstack.storage.datastore.lifecycle.CloudStackPrimaryDataStoreLifeCycleImpl.initialize(CloudStackPrimaryDataStoreLifeCycleImpl.java:319)
> at
> com.cloud.storage.StorageManagerImpl.createLocalStorage(StorageManagerImpl.java:647)
> at
> com.cloud.utils.component.ComponentInstantiationPostProcessor$InterceptorDispatcher.intercept(ComponentInstantiationPostProcessor.java:125)
> at
> com.cloud.storage.LocalStoragePoolListener.processConnect(LocalStoragePoolListener.java:86)
> at
> com.cloud.agent.manager.AgentManagerImpl.notifyMonitorsOfConnection(AgentManagerImpl.java:587)
> at
> com.cloud.agent.manager.AgentManagerImpl.handleConnectedAgent(AgentManagerImpl.java:1085)
> at
> com.cloud.agent.manager.AgentManagerImpl.access$100(AgentManagerImpl.java:144)
> at
> com.cloud.agent.manager.AgentManagerImpl$HandleAgentConnectTask.run(AgentManagerImpl.java:1160)
> at
> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1145)
> at
> java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615)
> at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:724)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
