On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Keith Freedman <freedman at freeformit.com>wrote: > > > > so, in the case where they both differ, how will we know which time > will be > > > associated with a file? > > > >The first subvol mentioned in the list is considered, if it is down, > >then the next is considered. > > ok, so I made sure that my subvolume list on the servers is in the same > order. > I had always listed the local volume first and the remote one second, > but it sounds like this would lead to each node using it's own > timestamps or do all the servers in the AFR elect a preferred 'first' > subvol? > > > > and will it fix the on-disk stamp or just ignore it provided the other > > > subvol is online? > > > >It will not fix the time stamp if they differ. > > how about new files being replicated.. they'll get the timestamp of > the server from which the source file is available? > > in other words.. if I add a new empty volume, and AFR copies > everything to it... what dates will be on the local files? During self-heal afr sets the timestamps (atime and mtime) to that of the file on the source node. > > > > > ideally, it will pick one, and make sure all the others are 'reset' to > that > > > so that if the preferred vol goes offline, timestamps don't suddenly > get > > > weird. > > > >True, but ideally all servers and clients should be time synced using > >ntp. For example if clients > >are not in sync, one of them might see time stamp of the future. > > mine are using ntp, so, again, if they differ,it's by microseconds. > > Keith > > > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > Gluster-users at gluster.org > http://zresearch.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > -- Raghavendra G -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://zresearch.com/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20081231/826110ca/attachment.htm
