Nope, a repair won't change anything if scrub doesn't detect any inconsistencies. There must be something else going on, but I can't fathom what...I'll try and look through it a bit more tomorrow. :/ -Greg Software Engineer #42 @ http://inktank.com | http://ceph.com On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 3:49 PM, Oliver Daudey <oliver@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hey Gregory, > > Thanks for your explanation. Turns out to be 1.a7 and it seems to scrub > OK. > > # ceph osd getmap -o osdmap > # osdmaptool --test-map-object mds_anchortable --pool 1 osdmap > osdmaptool: osdmap file 'osdmap' > object 'mds_anchortable' -> 1.a7 -> [2,0] > # ceph pg scrub 1.a7 > > osd.2 logs: > 2013-09-11 00:41:15.843302 7faf56b1b700 0 log [INF] : 1.a7 scrub ok > > osd.0 didn't show anything in it's logs, though. Should I try a repair > next? > > > Regards, > > Oliver > > On di, 2013-09-10 at 15:01 -0700, Gregory Farnum wrote: >> If the problem is somewhere in RADOS/xfs/whatever, then there's a good >> chance that the "mds_anchortable" object exists in its replica OSDs, >> but when listing objects those aren't queried, so they won't show up >> in a listing. You can use the osdmaptool to map from an object name to >> the PG it would show up in, or if you look at your log you should see >> a line something like >> 1 -- <LOCAL IP> --> <OTHER IP> -- osd_op(mds.0.31:3 mds_anchortable >> [read 0~0] 1.a977f6a7 e165) v4 -- ?+0 0x1e88d80 con 0x1f189a0 >> In this example, metadata is pool 1 and 1.a977f6a7 is the hash of the >> msd_anchortable object, and depending on how many PGs are in the pool >> it will be in pg 1.a7, or 1.6a7, or 1.f6a7... >> -Greg >> Software Engineer #42 @ http://inktank.com | http://ceph.com >> >> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Oliver Daudey <oliver@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > Hey Gregory, >> > >> > The only objects containing "table" I can find at all, are in the >> > "metadata"-pool: >> > # rados --pool=metadata ls | grep -i table >> > mds0_inotable >> > >> > Looking at another cluster where I use CephFS, there is indeed an object >> > named "mds_anchortable", but the broken cluster is missing it. I don't >> > see how I can scrub the PG for an object that doesn't appear to exist. >> > Please elaborate. >> > >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > Oliver >> > >> > On di, 2013-09-10 at 14:06 -0700, Gregory Farnum wrote: >> >> Also, can you scrub the PG which contains the "mds_anchortable" object >> >> and see if anything comes up? You should be able to find the key from >> >> the logs (in the osd_op line that contains "mds_anchortable") and >> >> convert that into the PG. Or you can just scrub all of osd 2. >> >> -Greg >> >> Software Engineer #42 @ http://inktank.com | http://ceph.com >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Gregory Farnum <greg@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> > It's not an upgrade issue. There's an MDS object that is somehow >> >> > missing. If it exists, then on restart you'll be fine. >> >> > >> >> > Oliver, what is your general cluster config? What filesystem are your >> >> > OSDs running on? What version of Ceph were you upgrading from? There's >> >> > really no way for this file to not exist once created unless the >> >> > underlying FS ate it or the last write both was interrupted and hit >> >> > some kind of bug in our transaction code (of which none are known) >> >> > during replay. >> >> > -Greg >> >> > Software Engineer #42 @ http://inktank.com | http://ceph.com >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:44 PM, Liu, Larry <Larry.Liu@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> This is scary. Should I hold on upgrade? >> >> >> >> >> >> On 9/10/13 11:33 AM, "Oliver Daudey" <oliver@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>>Hey Gregory, >> >> >>> >> >> >>>On 10-09-13 20:21, Gregory Farnum wrote: >> >> >>>> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Oliver Daudey <oliver@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> >>>>wrote: >> >> >>>>> Hey list, >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> I just upgraded to Ceph 0.67.3. What I did on every node of my 3-node >> >> >>>>> cluster was: >> >> >>>>> - Unmount CephFS everywhere. >> >> >>>>> - Upgrade the Ceph-packages. >> >> >>>>> - Restart MON. >> >> >>>>> - Restart OSD. >> >> >>>>> - Restart MDS. >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> As soon as I got to the second node, the MDS crashed right after >> >> >>>>>startup. >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> Part of the logs (more on request): >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> -> 194.109.43.12:6802/53419 -- osd_op(mds.0.58:4 mds_snaptable [read >> >> >>>>> 0~0] 1.d902 >> >> >>>>> 70ad e37647) v4 -- ?+0 0x1e48d80 con 0x1e5d9a0 >> >> >>>>> -11> 2013-09-10 19:35:02.798962 7fd1ba81f700 2 mds.0.58 boot_start >> >> >>>>> 1: openin >> >> >>>>> g mds log >> >> >>>>> -10> 2013-09-10 19:35:02.798968 7fd1ba81f700 5 mds.0.log open >> >> >>>>> discovering lo >> >> >>>>> g bounds >> >> >>>>> -9> 2013-09-10 19:35:02.798988 7fd1ba81f700 1 mds.0.journaler(ro) >> >> >>>>> recover s >> >> >>>>> tart >> >> >>>>> -8> 2013-09-10 19:35:02.798990 7fd1ba81f700 1 mds.0.journaler(ro) >> >> >>>>> read_head >> >> >>>>> -7> 2013-09-10 19:35:02.799028 7fd1ba81f700 1 -- >> >> >>>>> 194.109.43.12:6800/67277 - >> >> >>>>> -> 194.109.43.11:6800/16562 -- osd_op(mds.0.58:5 200.00000000 [read >> >> >>>>>0~0] >> >> >>>>> 1.844f3 >> >> >>>>> 494 e37647) v4 -- ?+0 0x1e48b40 con 0x1e5db00 >> >> >>>>> -6> 2013-09-10 19:35:02.799053 7fd1ba81f700 1 -- >> >> >>>>> 194.109.43.12:6800/67277 < >> >> >>>>> == mon.2 194.109.43.13:6789/0 16 ==== mon_subscribe_ack(300s) v1 ==== >> >> >>>>> 20+0+0 (42 >> >> >>>>> 35168662 0 0) 0x1e93380 con 0x1e5d580 >> >> >>>>> -5> 2013-09-10 19:35:02.799099 7fd1ba81f700 10 monclient: >> >> >>>>> handle_subscribe_a >> >> >>>>> ck sent 2013-09-10 19:35:02.796448 renew after 2013-09-10 >> >> >>>>>19:37:32.796448 >> >> >>>>> -4> 2013-09-10 19:35:02.800907 7fd1ba81f700 5 mds.0.58 >> >> >>>>> ms_handle_connect on >> >> >>>>> 194.109.43.12:6802/53419 >> >> >>>>> -3> 2013-09-10 19:35:02.800927 7fd1ba81f700 5 mds.0.58 >> >> >>>>> ms_handle_connect on >> >> >>>>> 194.109.43.13:6802/45791 >> >> >>>>> -2> 2013-09-10 19:35:02.801176 7fd1ba81f700 5 mds.0.58 >> >> >>>>> ms_handle_connect on >> >> >>>>> 194.109.43.11:6800/16562 >> >> >>>>> -1> 2013-09-10 19:35:02.803546 7fd1ba81f700 1 -- >> >> >>>>> 194.109.43.12:6800/67277 < >> >> >>>>> == osd.2 194.109.43.13:6802/45791 1 ==== osd_op_reply(3 mds_anchortable >> >> >>>>> [read 0~ >> >> >>>>> 0] ack = -2 (No such file or directory)) v4 ==== 114+0+0 (3107677671 0 >> >> >>>>> 0) 0x1e4d >> >> >>>>> e00 con 0x1e5ddc0 >> >> >>>>> 0> 2013-09-10 19:35:02.805611 7fd1ba81f700 -1 mds/MDSTable.cc: In >> >> >>>>> function >> >> >>>>> 'void MDSTable::load_2(int, ceph::bufferlist&, Context*)' thread >> >> >>>>> 7fd1ba81f700 ti >> >> >>>>> me 2013-09-10 19:35:02.803673 >> >> >>>>> mds/MDSTable.cc: 152: FAILED assert(r >= 0) >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> ceph version 0.67.3 (408cd61584c72c0d97b774b3d8f95c6b1b06341a) >> >> >>>>> 1: (MDSTable::load_2(int, ceph::buffer::list&, Context*)+0x44f) >> >> >>>>>[0x77ce7f] >> >> >>>>> 2: (Objecter::handle_osd_op_reply(MOSDOpReply*)+0xe3b) [0x7d891b] >> >> >>>>> 3: (MDS::handle_core_message(Message*)+0x987) [0x56f527] >> >> >>>>> 4: (MDS::_dispatch(Message*)+0x2f) [0x56f5ef] >> >> >>>>> 5: (MDS::ms_dispatch(Message*)+0x19b) [0x5710bb] >> >> >>>>> 6: (DispatchQueue::entry()+0x592) [0x92e432] >> >> >>>>> 7: (DispatchQueue::DispatchThread::entry()+0xd) [0x8a59bd] >> >> >>>>> 8: (()+0x68ca) [0x7fd1bed298ca] >> >> >>>>> 9: (clone()+0x6d) [0x7fd1bda5cb6d] >> >> >>>>> NOTE: a copy of the executable, or `objdump -rdS <executable>` is >> >> >>>>> needed to interpret this. >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> When trying to mount CephFS, it just hangs now. Sometimes, an MDS >> >> >>>>>stays >> >> >>>>> up for a while, but will eventually crash again. This CephFS was >> >> >>>>> created on 0.67 and I haven't done anything but mount and use it under >> >> >>>>> very light load in the mean time. >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> Any ideas, or if you need more info, let me know. It would be nice to >> >> >>>>> get my data back, but I have backups too. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> Does the filesystem have any data in it? Every time we've seen this >> >> >>>> error it's been on an empty cluster which had some weird issue with >> >> >>>> startup. >> >> >>> >> >> >>>This one certainly had some data on it, yes. A couple of 100's of GBs >> >> >>>of disk-images and a couple of trees of smaller files. Most of them >> >> >>>accessed very rarely since being copied on. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Regards, >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Oliver >> >> >>>_______________________________________________ >> >> >>>ceph-users mailing list >> >> >>>ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> >> >>>http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> > > _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
 |