Den 05.02.2012 22:22, skrev Whit Blauvelt: > Not sure if you're asking your questions precisely enough. The clues may be > in your inclusions, but I'm not going to read all that to figure it out so > I'll ask directly: > >> Short description of my test >> ---------------------------- >> * 4 replicas on single machine >> * glusterfs mounted locally >> * Create file on glusterfs-mounted directory: date>data.txt > Did you write it through a gluster (or nfs) mount of the gluster file > system, or sneak around behind it with a direct local mount of the > partition? This was of course done to the glusterfs-type mounted filesystem. So that the glusterfs-client can save it out on all the bricks. > >> * Append to file on one of the bricks: hostname>>data.txt > Again, through a gluster/nfs mount, or a local mount? This was done directly to a brick (local mount) to try to simulate some disk-problems. Appending to the file would keep the extended attributes. Gluster should still handle the file as its own. >> * Trigger a self-heal with: stat data.txt > Again, stat'ing it on a gluster/nfs mount, or a local mount? The stat was done to the glusterfs-type mount. As I understand it, the healing is done by the glusterfs-client. >> => Modified file on the brick is still different from the three >> other bricks. > Again ... well you know. > >> Q1: Is the modified file supposed to get corrected in my case? >> >> Q2: Is my test-case invalid for what gluster is supposed to handle? > If you're writing to files through mounts which gluster isn't handling, > you'll get inconsistent stuff. Eventually gluster should catch up. But by > design you should do everything through gluster. (An exception may be if you > want a faster local file read ... anything that writes or touches the file > should be through gluster in any case.) I know everything has to be done through an glusterfs-mounted filesystem (lets keep the nfs-mounting away). But my goal is to simulate something going wrong on a disk. That is not predicted events done through a glusterfs-mounted filesystem but rather happens directly to a brick. I have tested if files are missing on a brick => It is copied from another replica when healed. There are however failures that fall in between the 100% working brick and the one which is 100% disappeared. These cases interests me. > Best, > Whit >
