Thanks Sanoj for the work and pasting the work in detail.
--
Thanks & Regards,
Manikandan Selvaganesan.
(@Manikandan Selvaganesh on Web)
On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 3:31 PM, Manikandan Selvaganesh <manikandancs333@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Yes Sanoj, that's the issue. It will somehow write the latest header which has conf 1.2.But for all the individual gfid's it won't work properly always. We need to do it many timesand sometimes it will be still not set properly.--Thanks & Regards,Manikandan Selvaganesan.(@Manikandan Selvaganesh on Web)On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 12:47 PM, Sanoj Unnikrishnan <sunnikri@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:SanojPasting Testing Logs
======================
3.6
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# /sbin/gluster v create v1 $tm1:/export/sdb/br1
volume create: v1: success: please start the volume to access data
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# gluster v start v1
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]#
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# mount -t glusterfs $tm1:v1 /gluster_vols/vol
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# gluster v quota v1 enable
volume quota : success
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]#
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# mkdir -p /gluster_vols/vol/dir1; gluster v quota v1 limit-usage /dir1 5MB 10
volume quota : success
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# mkdir -p /gluster_vols/vol/dir2; gluster v quota v1 limit-usage /dir2 16MB 10
volume quota : success
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# gluster v quota v1 list
Path Hard-limit Soft-limit Used Available Soft-limit exceeded? Hard-limit exceeded?
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ ------------------------------ ---
/dir15.0MB 10% 0Bytes 5.0MB No No
/dir216.0MB 10% 0Bytes 16.0MB No No
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]#
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]#
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# rpm -qa | grep glusterfs-ser
glusterfs-server-3.6.9-0.1.gitcaccd6c.fc24.x86_64
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# umount /gluster_vols/vol
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]#
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# cat /var/lib/glusterd/vols/v1/quota.conf
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# hexdump /var/lib/glusterd/vols/v1/quota.conf
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# hexdump -c /var/lib/glusterd/vols/v1/quota.conf
0000000 G l u s t e r F S Q u o t a
0000010 c o n f | v e r s i o n :
0000020 v 1 . 1 \n U \t 213 I 252 251 C 337 262 x \b
0000030 i y r 5 021 312 335 w 366 X 5 B H 210 260 227
0000040 ^ 251 X 237 G
0000045
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]#
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# getfattr -d -m. -e hex /export/sdb/br1/dir1/ | grep gfid
getfattr: Removing leading '/' from absolute path names
trusted.gfid=0x55098b49aaa943dfb278086979723511
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# getfattr -d -m. -e hex /export/sdb/br1/dir2/ | grep gfid
getfattr: Removing leading '/' from absolute path names
trusted.gfid=0xcadd77f65835424888b0975ea9589f47
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# gluster v stop v1
Stopping volume will make its data inaccessible. Do you want to continue? (y/n) y
volume stop: v1: success
[root@dhcp-0-112 rpms]# pkill glusterd
+++++++++++++++++++ Replace with 3.9 build without patch++++++++++
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# systemctl start glusterd
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]#
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# rpm -qa | grep glusterfs-ser
glusterfs-server-3.9.0rc2-0.13.gita3bade0.fc24.x86_64
[
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# gluster v set all cluster.op-version 30700
volume set: success
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# gluster v start v1
volume start: v1: success
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# mount -t glusterfs $tm1:v1 /gluster_vols/vol
>> not sure why we see this , second attempt succeeds
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# gluster v quota v1 limit-usage /dir1 12MB 10
quota command failed : Failed to start aux mount
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]#
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# gluster v quota v1 limit-usage /dir2 12MB 10
volume quota : success
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# hexdump -c /var/lib/glusterd/vols/v1/quota.conf
0000000 G l u s t e r F S Q u o t a
0000010 c o n f | v e r s i o n :
0000020 v 1 . 2 \n U \t 213 I 252 251 C 337 262 x \b
0000030 i y r 5 021 001 312 335 w 366 X 5 B H 210 260
0000040 227 ^ 251 X 237 G 001
0000047
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# gluster v quota v1 list
Path Hard-limit Soft-limit Used Available Soft-limit exceeded? Hard-limit exceeded?
------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ ------------------------------ -------
/dir15.0MB 10%(512.0KB) 0Bytes 5.0MB No No
/dir212.0MB 10%(1.2MB) 0Bytes 12.0MB No No
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]#
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# gluster v quota v1 limit-usage /dir1 12MB 10
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# cksum /var/lib/glusterd/vols/v1/quota.conf
496616948 71 /var/lib/glusterd/vols/v1/quota.conf
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]#
>> Now we disable , followed by enable and set the same limits to check if we get the same quota.conf contents
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# /sbin/gluster v quota v1 disable
Disabling quota will delete all the quota configuration. Do you want to continue? (y/n) y
quota command failed : Volume quota failed. The cluster is operating at version 30700. Quota command disable is unavailable in this version.
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]#
>> we need to upgrade to 3_7_12 to use disable
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# gluster v set all cluster.op-version 30712
volume set: success
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# /sbin/gluster v quota v1 disable
Disabling quota will delete all the quota configuration. Do you want to continue? (y/n) y
volume quota : success
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# /sbin/gluster v quota v1 enable
volume quota : success
>> again we hit it,
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# gluster v quota v1 limit-usage /dir1 12MB 10
quota command failed : Failed to start aux mount
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]#
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# gluster v quota v1 limit-usage /dir1 12MB 10
volume quota : success
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# gluster v quota v1 limit-usage /dir2 12MB 10
volume quota : success
>> we get same quota.conf contents, confirming that the limit-usage rewrites quota.conf correctly
[root@dhcp-0-112 3.9]# cksum /var/lib/glusterd/vols/v1/quota.conf
496616948 71 /var/lib/glusterd/vols/v1/quota.conf
I Notice that while the limit-usage command does rewrite quota.conf correctly, the command does not always succeed.
So the user may have to try it multiple times.Thanks and Regards,On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 2:42 AM, Vijay Bellur <vbellur@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Maybe we should not flip the LATEST for non-RPM distributions inOn Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:56 AM, Niels de Vos <ndevos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:44:21AM -0500, Vijay Bellur wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Shyam <srangana@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On 11/10/2016 11:01 AM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:49 AM, Shyam <srangana@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On 11/10/2016 10:21 AM, Vijay Bellur wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 10, 2016 at 10:16 AM, Manikandan Selvaganesh
>> >>>> <manikandancs333@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>>> Given that we are done with the last release in 3.6.x, I think there
>> >>>> would be users looking to upgrade. My vote is to include the
>> >>>> necessary patches in 3.9 and not let users go through unnatural
>> >>>> workflows to get quota working again in 3.9.0.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> <Comment is without knowing if the necessary patches are good to go>
>> >>>
>> >>> Consider this a curiosity question ATM,
>> >>>
>> >>> 3.9 is an LTM, right? So we are not stating workflows here are set in
>> >>> stone?
>> >>> Can this not be an projected workflow?
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 3.9 is a STM release as per [1].
>> >
>> >
>> > Sorry, I meant STM.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> Irrespective of a release being LTM or not, being able to upgrade to a
>> >> release without operational disruptions is a requirement.
>> >
>> >
>> > I would say upgrade to an STM *maybe* painful, as it is an STM and hence may
>> > contain changes that are yet to be announced stable or changed workflows
>> > that are not easy to upgrade to. We do need to document them though, even
>> > for the STM.
>> >
>> > Along these lines, the next LTM should be as stated, i.e "without
>> > operational disruptions". The STM is for adventurous folks, no?
>> >
>>
>> In my view STM releases for getting new features out early. This would
>> enable early adopters to try and provide feedback about new features.
>> Existing features and upgrades should work smoothly. IOW, we do not
>> want to have known regressions for existing features in STM releases.
>> New features might have rough edges and this should be amply
>> advertised.
>
> I do not think users on 3.6 are the right consumers for a STM release.
> These users are conservative and did not ugrade earlier. I doubt they
> are interested in new features *now*. Users that did not upgrade before,
> are unlikely the users that will upgrade in three months when 3.9 is
> EOL.
>
>> In this specific case, quota has not undergone any significant changes
>> in 3.9 and letting such a relatively unchanged feature affect users
>> upgrading from 3.6 does not seem right to me. Also note that since
>> LATEST in d.g.o would point to 3.9.0 after the release, users
>> performing package upgrades on their systems could end up with 3.9.0
>> inadvertently.
>
> The packages from the CentOS Storage SIG will by default provide the
> latest LTM release. The STM release is provided in addition, and needs
> an extra step to enable.
>
> I am not sure how we can handle this in other distributions (or also
> with the packages on d.g.o.).
d.g.o? or should we introduce LTM/LATEST and encourage users to change
their repository files to point to this?
Packaging in distributions would be handled by package maintainers and
I presume they can decide the appropriateness of a release for
packaging?
Thanks,
Vijay
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
_______________________________________________
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
