[Bug 1208437] New: "It was not possible to propose an initial partitioning layout"
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208437 Bug ID: 1208437 Summary: "It was not possible to propose an initial partitioning layout" Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Distribution Version: Leap 15.5 Hardware: Other OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: YaST2 Assignee: yast2-maintainers@suse.de Reporter: martin.wilck@suse.com QA Contact: jsrain@suse.com Found By: --- Blocker: --- I was using a 15G disk for a VM installation. Because I use minimal installations usually, I know for certain that this disk won't be more than 10% full after I install. But YaST won't partition this disk if I either select btrfs snapshots, or the "transactional server" role. In both cases, the reason is probably an (estimated) lack of disk space. But the error message gives no clue about that. It just says "It was not possible to propose an initial partitioning layout even after adjusting the Guided Setup settings: - do not propose swap. Please, use 'Guided Setup' to adjust the proposal settings or 'Expert Partitioner' to create a custom layout". But using "Guided Setup" doesn't help, it just fails with the same error message, again. And at least for the "transactional server" case, I am an unsure how to setup the partitions correctly with the "expert" partitioner. At least there, when I click "Accept", I get a somewhat more helpful error popup telling me that a 20GB root device is necessary, where I can either say yes or no. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208437 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208437#c1 Stefan Hundhammer <shundhammer@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |ancor@suse.com Flags| |needinfo?(ancor@suse.com) Severity|Normal |Minor --- Comment #1 from Stefan Hundhammer <shundhammer@suse.com> --- We have certain criteria that must be met for certain storage layouts. One of them is a minimum amount of free disk space, configured in control.xml on the installation medium on a per-product basis, to enable features like Btrfs snapshots. Of course, as always, once we start being so configurable, more and more config options and criteria keep coming from all sides; and at some point, the clear error message that we once had is so watered down that it doesn't tell anybody anything. I guess this is what happened here. Ancor? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208437 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208437#c2 --- Comment #2 from Martin Wilck <martin.wilck@suse.com> --- Thanks. Note that the primary issue here is IMO that running the guided setup does not remedy the situation, although the error message suggests that it would. It would also be very helpful if the constraints from control.xml were transparent in the guided setup. For example, if there was a label or tool tip next to the "enable snapshots" check box saying "enabling snapshots requires at least xyz GB of disk space". -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208437 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208437#c3 Ancor Gonzalez Sosa <ancor@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Flags|needinfo?(ancor@suse.com) | --- Comment #3 from Ancor Gonzalez Sosa <ancor@suse.com> --- (In reply to Martin Wilck from comment #2)
Note that the primary issue here is IMO that running the guided setup does not remedy the situation, although the error message suggests that it would.
Well. It suggests to run the Guided Setup to adjust the settings and try again. It doesn't guarantee there is a set of settings that will work for your case and your desires. ;-)
It would also be very helpful if the constraints from control.xml were transparent in the guided setup. For example, if there was a label or tool tip next to the "enable snapshots" check box saying "enabling snapshots requires at least xyz GB of disk space".
That's indeed the main problem here. There is no guidance in the UI about how each setting affects the size of the needed partitions. Especially the "enable snapshots" one, which may have a huge impact (in the concrete case of Leap, it increases the requirement for the root partition in a 250%). Giving a good overview is quite hard. Almost any setting (enabling a separate home, enabling snapshots, adjusting the RAM size...) can have an impact in several of the proposed file-systems. And those impacts vary from one combination of product+role to another. We are trying an alternative approach in D-Installer that should make the implications of every change way more visible. See https://github.com/yast/d-installer/blob/master/doc/storage_ui.md#general-wo... Of course, we don't need to go that far in YaST. Showing some label about what's the min size for "/" or about how the presence of snapshots multiplies the min size (as said, by 3.5x in the case of Leap) would already help people to figure out what is wrong. On the other hand and based on priorities, I wouldn't promise that will happen in the short term. :-( -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208437 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208437#c4 --- Comment #4 from Ancor Gonzalez Sosa <ancor@suse.com> --- If a certain role like "transactional server" requires 20 GiB of disk due to mandatory snapshots, it would be good to state that clearly in the description of the role (both in the description shown in the installer and in the description presented in general in web-pages and so). It looks like an important piece of information when deciding whether to use such a role or when dimensioning the virtual machine for it. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208437 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208437#c5 --- Comment #5 from Martin Wilck <martin.wilck@suse.com> --- Ack(In reply to Ancor Gonzalez Sosa from comment #3)
(In reply to Martin Wilck from comment #2)
Note that the primary issue here is IMO that running the guided setup does not remedy the situation, although the error message suggests that it would.
Well. It suggests to run the Guided Setup to adjust the settings and try again. It doesn't guarantee there is a set of settings that will work for your case and your desires. ;-)
The problem was that the guided setup didn't offer any settings that I could have used to fix the issue.
That's indeed the main problem here. There is no guidance in the UI about how each setting affects the size of the needed partitions. Especially the "enable snapshots" one, which may have a huge impact (in the concrete case of Leap, it increases the requirement for the root partition in a 250%).
Yes, I think that's the fallout of dozens of bug reports about ENOSPC issues with btrfs. And there's no clean solution, because how much space is really required depends on snapper settings, frequency of system updates, overall installatoin size, the weather, and whatnot. In a minimal installation, 10G can be just fine *with* snapshots, while elsewhere 100G can be tight. I think that at least if the guided setup logic decides that a certain option is greyed out / unavailable, it should provide a hint to the user, telling her the reason. If the logic is too complex to untangle and display to the user in an understable fashion, maybe the complex logic itself is the issue?
See https://github.com/yast/d-installer/blob/master/doc/storage_ui.md#general-wo...
That looks promising, indeed. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208437 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1208437#c6 Stefan Hundhammer <shundhammer@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |CONFIRMED URL| |https://trello.com/c/SXQ70E | |2k Assignee|yast2-maintainers@suse.de |yast-internal@suse.de --- Comment #6 from Stefan Hundhammer <shundhammer@suse.com> --- Moving to Trello for consideration in a future sprint. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
participants (1)
-
bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com