Re: xfs_rename error and brick offline

[Paul <flypen@xxxxxxxxx>]

Vijay,

Yes, I find it's a problem of xfs later. After upgrading xfs code, I've not seen this problem again.

Thanks a lot!

Paul

On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 12:08 AM, Vijay Bellur <vbellur@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 6:23 AM, Paul <flypen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi,

I have a 5-nodes GlusterFS cluster with Distributed-Replicate. There are 180 bricks in total. The OS is CentOS6.5, and GlusterFS is 3.11.0. I find many bricks are offline when we generate some empty files and rename them. I see xfs call trace in every node. 

For example,

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: XFS (rdc00d28p2): Internal error xfs_trans_cancel at line 1948 of file fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c.  Caller 0xffffffffa04e33f9

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel:

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: Pid: 9939, comm: glusterfsd Tainted: G           --------------- H  2.6.32-prsys.1.1.0.13.x86_64 #1

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: Call Trace:

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffffa04c803f>] ? xfs_error_report+0x3f/0x50 [xfs]

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffffa04e33f9>] ? xfs_rename+0x2c9/0x6c0 [xfs]

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffffa04e5e39>] ? xfs_trans_cancel+0xd9/0x100 [xfs]

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffffa04e33f9>] ? xfs_rename+0x2c9/0x6c0 [xfs]

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffff811962c5>] ? mntput_no_expire+0x25/0xb0

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffffa04f5a06>] ? xfs_vn_rename+0x66/0x70 [xfs]

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffff81184580>] ? vfs_rename+0x2a0/0x500

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffff81182cd6>] ? generic_permission+0x16/0xa0

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffff811882d9>] ? sys_renameat+0x369/0x420

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffff81185f06>] ? final_putname+0x26/0x50

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffff81186189>] ? putname+0x29/0x40

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffff811861f9>] ? user_path_at+0x59/0xa0

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffff8151dc79>] ? unroll_tree_refs+0x16/0xbc

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffff810d1698>] ? audit_syscall_entry+0x2d8/0x300

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffff811883ab>] ? sys_rename+0x1b/0x20

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: [<ffffffff8100b032>] ? system_call_fastpath+0x16/0x1b

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: XFS (rdc00d28p2): xfs_do_force_shutdown(0x8) called from line 1949 of file fs/xfs/xfs_trans.c.  Return address = 0xffffffffa04e5e52

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: XFS (rdc00d28p2): Corruption of in-memory data detected.  Shutting down filesystem

Nov 16 11:15:12 node10 kernel: XFS (rdc00d28p2): Please umount the filesystem and rectify the problem(s)

Nov 16 11:15:30 node10 disks-FAvUzxiL-brick[29742]: [2017-11-16 11:15:30.206208] M [MSGID: 113075] [posix-helpers.c:1891:posix_health_check_thread_proc] 0-data-posix: health-check failed, going down

Nov 16 11:15:30 node10 disks-FAvUzxiL-brick[29742]: [2017-11-16 11:15:30.206538] M [MSGID: 113075] [posix-helpers.c:1908:posix_health_check_thread_proc] 0-data-posix: still alive! -> SIGTERM

Nov 16 11:15:37 node10 kernel: XFS (sdm): xfs_log_force: error 5 returned.

Nov 16 11:16:07 node10 kernel: XFS (sdm): xfs_log_force: error 5 returned.

As the logs indicate, xfs shut down and the posix health check feature in Gluster rendered the brick offline. You would be better off checking with the xfs community about this problem.

Regards,

Vijay 

_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users