gluster 1.3.12
Attribute "glusterfs.createtime" has a 10 byte value for file
Attribute "glusterfs.version" has a 1 byte value for file
Attribute "glusterfs.dht" has a 16 byte value for file
while gluster 2.0.0 has
Attribute "afr.brick2b" has a 12 byte value for file
Attribute "afr.brick1b" has a 12 byte value for file
I've been unsuccessful on fixing the attributes, can anybody point me in the right direction?
thanks,
liam
On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Liam Slusser <lslusser@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Big thanks to the devel group for fixing all the memory leak issues with the earlier RC releases. 2.0.0 has been great so far without any memory issues what-so-ever.I am seeing some oddities with the replication/distribute translators however. I have three partitions on each gluster server exporting three bricks - We have two servers. The gluster clients replicates each brick between the two servers and then i have a distribute translator for all the replicated bricks - basically gluster raid10.There are a handful of files which have been copied into the gluster volume but since have disappeared, however the physical files exist on both bricks.(from a client)[root@client1 049891002526]# pwd/intstore/data/tracks/tmg/2008_02_05/049891002526[root@client1 049891002526]# ls -al 049891002526_01_09.wma.sigKey01.kls: 049891002526_01_09.wma.sigKey01.k: No such file or directory[root@client1 049891002526]# head 049891002526_01_09.wma.sigKey01.khead: cannot open `049891002526_01_09.wma.sigKey01.k' for reading: No such file or directory[root@client1 049891002526]#(from a server brick)[root@server1 049891002526]# pwd/intstore/intstore01c/gcdata/data/tracks/tmg/2008_02_05/049891002526[root@server1 049891002526]# ls -al 049891002526_01_09.wma.sigKey01.k-rw-rw-rw- 1 10015 root 19377712 Feb 6 2008 049891002526_01_09.wma.sigKey01.k[root@server1 049891002526]# attr -l 049891002526_01_09.wma.sigKey01.kAttribute "glusterfs.createtime" has a 10 byte value for 049891002526_01_09.wma.sigKey01.kAttribute "glusterfs.version" has a 1 byte value for 049891002526_01_09.wma.sigKey01.kAttribute "selinux" has a 24 byte value for 049891002526_01_09.wma.sigKey01.k[root@server1 049891002526]# attr -l .Attribute "glusterfs.createtime" has a 10 byte value for .Attribute "glusterfs.version" has a 1 byte value for .Attribute "glusterfs.dht" has a 16 byte value for .Attribute "selinux" has a 24 byte value for .Nothing in both the client and server logs. I've tried all the normal replication checks and self-heal such as ls -alR. If i copy the file back from one of the bricks into the volume it will show up again however it has a 1/3 chance of getting written to the files original location. So then i end up with two identical files on two different bricks.This volume has over 40 million files and directories so it can be very tedious to find anomalies. I wrote a quick perl script to search 1/25 of our total files in the volume for missing files and md5 checksum differences and as of now its about 15% (138,500 files) complete and has found ~7000 missing files and 0 md5 checksum differences.How could i debug this? I'd image it has something to do with the extended attributes on either the file or parent directory...but as far as i can tell that all looks fine.thanks,liamclient glusterfs.vol:volume brick1atype protocol/clientoption transport-type tcpoption remote-host server1option remote-subvolume brick1aend-volumevolume brick1btype protocol/clientoption transport-type tcpoption remote-host server1option remote-subvolume brick1bend-volumevolume brick1ctype protocol/clientoption transport-type tcpoption remote-host server1option remote-subvolume brick1cend-volumevolume brick2atype protocol/clientoption transport-type tcpoption remote-host server2option remote-subvolume brick2aend-volume
volume brick2btype protocol/clientoption transport-type tcpoption remote-host server2option remote-subvolume brick2bend-volumevolume brick2ctype protocol/clientoption transport-type tcpoption remote-host server2option remote-subvolume brick2cend-volume
volume bricks1type cluster/replicatesubvolumes brick1a brick2aend-volumevolume bricks2type cluster/replicatesubvolumes brick1b brick2bend-volumevolume bricks3type cluster/replicatesubvolumes brick1c brick2cend-volumevolume distributetype cluster/distributesubvolumes bricks1 bricks2 bricks3end-volumevolume writebehindtype performance/write-behindoption block-size 1MBoption cache-size 64MBoption flush-behind onsubvolumes distributeend-volumevolume cachetype performance/io-cacheoption cache-size 2048MBsubvolumes writebehindend-volumeserver glusterfsd.vol:volume intstore01atype storage/posixoption directory /intstore/intstore01a/gcdataend-volumevolume intstore01btype storage/posixoption directory /intstore/intstore01b/gcdataend-volumevolume intstore01ctype storage/posixoption directory /intstore/intstore01c/gcdataend-volumevolume locksatype features/posix-locksoption mandatory-locks onsubvolumes intstore01aend-volumevolume locksbtype features/posix-locksoption mandatory-locks onsubvolumes intstore01bend-volumevolume locksctype features/posix-locksoption mandatory-locks onsubvolumes intstore01cend-volumevolume brick1atype performance/io-threadsoption thread-count 32subvolumes locksaend-volumevolume brick1btype performance/io-threadsoption thread-count 32subvolumes locksbend-volumevolume brick1ctype performance/io-threadsoption thread-count 32subvolumes lockscend-volumevolume servertype protocol/serveroption transport-type tcpoption auth.addr.brick1a.allow 192.168.12.*option auth.addr.brick1b.allow 192.168.12.*option auth.addr.brick1c.allow 192.168.12.*subvolumes brick1a brick1b brick1cend-volumeOn Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Liam Slusser <lslusser@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Avati,Big thanks. Looks like that did the trick. I'll report back in the morning if anything has changed but its looking MUCH better. Thanks again!liamOn Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 2:32 PM, Anand Avati <avati@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Liam,
An fd leak and a lock structure leak has been fixed in the git
repository, which explains a leak in the first subvolume's server.
Please pull the latest patches and let us know if it does not fixe
your issues. Thanks!
Avati
On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 3:41 PM, Liam Slusser <lslusser@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> There is still a memory leak with rc8 on my setup. The first server in a
> cluster or two servers starts out using 18M and just slowly increases.
> After 30mins it has doubled in size to over 30M and just keeps growing -
> the more memory it uses the worst the performance. Funny that the second
> server in my cluster using the same configuration file has no such memory
> problem.
> My glusterfsd.vol has no performance translators, just 3 storage/posix -> 3
> features/posix-locks -> protocol/server.
> thanks,
> liam
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Gordan Bobic <gordan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Gordan Bobic wrote:
>>>
>>> First-access failing bug still seems to be present.
>>> But other than that, it seems to be distinctly better than rc4. :)
>>> Good work! :)
>>
>> And that massive memory leak is gone, too! The process hasn't grown by a
>> KB after a kernel compile! :D
>>
>> s/Good work/Awesome work/
>>
>> :)
>>
>>
>> Gordan
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gluster-devel mailing list
>> Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
>> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
>
>