From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D90B8005E for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:24:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 21FC317698 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:24:35 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 1179217688 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:24:34 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D847F43C42 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:24:33 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:24:32 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:95.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/95.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox VE development discussion , Fabian Ebner References: <20211116130822.47803-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <20211116130822.47803-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.113 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [node.name] Subject: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH manager] ui: ceph: osd: handle edge case with dead node X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 13:24:35 -0000 On 16.11.21 14:08, Fabian Ebner wrote: > If there is a left-over entry for a dead node in the ceph osd tree > the panel wouldn't show and produce an > Uncaught TypeError: data.versions is undefined > because of an access > node.version = data.versions[node.name]; > further below (not visible in the patch itself). > > AFAICT, the same issue would also happen when something went wrong > with getting the broadcasted ceph-versions, or when a node is part > of Ceph, but not PVE. > > Handle the situation gracefully by always initializing data.versions. > > Signed-off-by: Fabian Ebner > --- > www/manager6/ceph/OSD.js | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > applied, thanks!