XCP-ng
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    multipath.conf is incorrect

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Development
    iscsiqnapprioritymultipath
    10 Posts 3 Posters 3.0k Views 2 Watching
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • a573A Offline
      a573
      last edited by

      Hello,

      The QNAP setting in multipath.conf is incorrect. The settings cannot be called correctly because the product attribute is different. It seems to work with default values.

      I will feed back my experience to XCP-NG project.


      product attribute - [Underbar is incorrect. Space is correct]

      /etc/multipath.xenserver/multipath.conf.old

      device {
                      vendor                  "QNAP"
                      product                 "iSCSI_Storage"
              }
      

      /etc/multipath.xenserver/multipath.conf

      device {
                      vendor                  "QNAP"
                      product                 "iSCSI Storage"
              }
      

      I was editing multipath.conf to give priority to multipathing sessions.
      I started debugging because the settings didn't apply. You have noticed a difference in the call string "iSCSI Storage".

      [16:30 xxxxxxxxx etc]# multipath -ll
      xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx dm-0 QNAP    ,iSCSI Storage   
      size=20T features='1 queue_if_no_path' hwhandler='0' wp=rw
      |-+- policy='round-robin 0' prio=9 status=active
      | `- 9:0:0:0  sdb 8:16 active ready running
      `-+- policy='round-robin 0' prio=1 status=enabled
        `- 10:0:0:0 sdc 8:32 active ready running
      

      By replacing the underscore with a space, the setting is now recognized correctly and the session can be given priority.

      device {
                      vendor                  "QNAP"
                      product                 "iSCSI Storage"
                      path_grouping_policy    "failover"
                      path_selector           "round-robin 0"
                      path_checker            readsector0
                      prio                    weightedpath
                      prio_args               "hbtl 9:0:0:0 9 10:0:0:0 1"
                      uid_attribute           ID_SERIAL
              }
      

      My Storage: TS-432PXU-RP
      Version: 5.0.0.1828 Build 20211020

      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
      • stormiS Offline
        stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
        last edited by

        Do you know whether the value changed during QNAP's product history? I wouldn't want to break it for older devices.

        a573A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • a573A Offline
          a573 @stormi
          last edited by

          I don't know if the QNAP specifications have changed.
          I searched past information.

          I found another post of 2019 year. In this post, it was "iSCSI Storage". (Spaced)
          https://www.reddit.com/r/qnap/comments/fv514j/iscsi_vendor_and_product_for_multipathd_config/

          I found official QNAP report of 2018 year. it was "iSCSI Storage". (Spaced)
          https://www.qnap.com/ja-jp/how-to/tutorial/article/configuring-linux-iscsi-storage-with-qnap-es-nas

          I found Citrix forum of 2018 year. it was "iSCSI Storage". (Spaced)
          https://discussions.citrix.com/topic/394780-how-to-use-iscsi-target-directly-in-xenserver/page/2/


          It's not smart, but you might be able to follow both old and new by listing two blocks of underbars and spaces. In my debugging, I made a distinction between underbars and spaces, so I thought it would be solved by writing two blocks.

          I put two blocks in my server's multipath.conf, check it and reply. Please give me some time.
          Are there any commands or logs you would like me to check?

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • stormiS Offline
            stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
            last edited by

            I'm not knowledgeable in multipathing so I couldn't tell.

            I'd be interested in hearing from other QNAP users who'd use multipathing.

            The source of this configuration file is https://github.com/xapi-project/sm/blob/master/multipath/multipath.conf. You may try to open an issue or a pull request there to try and reach the developer who originally added the QNAP section.

            It would be probably very useful to also reach for QNAP developers themselves and ask them about this. Maybe they'll answer that there never was an underscore and then we'd know for sure.

            a573A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • a573A Offline
              a573 @stormi
              last edited by

              I wrote two blocks of underscores and spaces in my QNAP environment.
              A forward match was detected and two blocks were read as separate configurations.
              This method lists both old and new, so I don't think there will be any problems if old QNAPs use underscores.

              I will try to contact github.

              stormiS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • stormiS Offline
                stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team @a573
                last edited by stormi

                @a573 I'm confident creating two blocks would work, but if the one with an underscore is bogus, I'd rather not keep it. Especially when we'll have to contribute the fix upstream, and they'll want a clean config.

                a573A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • a573A Offline
                  a573 @stormi
                  last edited by

                  @stormi

                  I sent a PULL request to the fork source.
                  https://github.com/xapi-project/sm/pull/576

                  a573net opened this pull request in xapi-project/sm

                  closed QNAP product attribute is incorrect #576

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                  • stormiS Offline
                    stormi Vates 🪐 XCP-ng Team
                    last edited by

                    Congratulations for the merged pull request. We'll probably backport the fix to the next updates for XCP-ng 8.2.

                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                    • olivierlambertO Offline
                      olivierlambert Vates 🪐 Co-Founder CEO
                      last edited by

                      Thanks a lot @a573

                      We know it was a difficult process, I assure you that we'll do our best to assist if you have other contributions to make!

                      a573A 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • a573A Offline
                        a573 @olivierlambert
                        last edited by

                        @stormi, @olivierlambert

                        Thanks to everyone, I was able to complete it.
                        Thank you very much!!

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                        • First post
                          Last post