Hi everybody, I have created a distributed dispersed volume on 4.1.5 under centos7 like this a few days ago: gluster volume create data_vol1 disperse-data 4 redundancy 2 transport tcp \ \ gf-p-d-01.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick1/brick \ gf-p-d-03.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick1/brick \ gf-p-d-04.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick1/brick \ gf-p-k-01.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick1/brick \ gf-p-k-03.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick1/brick \ gf-p-k-04.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick1/brick \ \ gf-p-d-01.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick2/brick \ gf-p-d-03.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick2/brick \ gf-p-d-04.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick2/brick \ gf-p-k-01.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick2/brick \ gf-p-k-03.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick2/brick \ gf-p-k-04.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick2/brick \ \ ... same for brick3 to brick9... \ gf-p-d-01.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick10/brick \ gf-p-d-03.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick10/brick \ gf-p-d-04.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick10/brick \ gf-p-k-01.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick10/brick \ gf-p-k-03.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick10/brick \ gf-p-k-04.isec.foobar.com:/bricks/brick10/brick This worked nicely and resulted in the following filesystem: [root@gf-p-d-01 ~]# df -h /data/ Dateisystem Größe Benutzt Verf. Verw% Eingehängt auf gf-p-d-01.isec.foobar.com:/data_vol1 219T 2,2T 217T 2% /data Each of the bricks resides on its own 6TB disk with 1 big partition formated with xfs. Yesterday a colleague looked at the filesystem and found some space missing... [root@gf-p-d-01 ~]# df -h /data/ Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on gf-p-d-01.isec.foobar.com:/data_vol1 22T 272G 22T 2% /data Some googling brought the following bug report against 3.4 which looks familiar: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1541830 So we did a quick grep shared-brick-count /var/lib/glusterd/vols/data_vol1/* on all boxes and found that on 5 out of 6 boxes this was shared-brick-count=0 for all bricks on remote boxes and 1 for local bricks. Is this the expected result or should we have all 1 everywhere (as the quick fix script from the case sets it)? Also on one box (the one where we created the volume from, btw) we have shared-brick-count=0 for all remote bricks and 10 for the local bricks. Is it possible that the bug from 3.4 still exists in 4.1.5 and should we try the filter script which sets shared-brick-count=1 for all bricks? The volume is not currently in production so now would be the time to play around and find the problem... TIA and regards, Joachim ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- FreeMail powered by mail.de - MEHR SICHERHEIT, SERIOSITÄT UND KOMFORT _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
