Good morning, looks like on 2 clients there was an automatic cleanup: [2019-03-21 05:04:52.857127] I [fuse-bridge.c:5144:fuse_thread_proc] 0-fuse: initating unmount of /data/repository/shared/public [2019-03-21 05:04:52.857507] W [glusterfsd.c:1500:cleanup_and_exit] (-->/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0(+0x74a4) [0x7fa062cf64a4] -->/usr/sbin/glusterfs(glusterfs_sigwaiter+ 0xfd) [0x56223e5b291d] -->/usr/sbin/glusterfs(cleanup_and_exit+0x54) [0x56223e5b2774] ) 0-: received signum (15), shutting down [2019-03-21 05:04:52.857532] I [fuse-bridge.c:5914:fini] 0-fuse: Unmounting '/data/repository/shared/public'. [2019-03-21 05:04:52.857547] I [fuse-bridge.c:5919:fini] 0-fuse: Closing fuse connection to '/data/repository/shared/public'. On the 3rd client i unmounted both volumes, killed the 4 processes and mounted the volumes again. Now no more "dict is NULL" messages. Fine :-) Best regards, Hubert Am Mi., 20. März 2019 um 09:39 Uhr schrieb Hu Bert <revirii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > Hi, > > i updated our live systems (debian stretch) from 5.3 -> 5.5 this > morning; update went fine so far :-) > > However, on 3 (of 9) clients, the log entries still appear. The > upgrade steps for all clients were identical: > > - install 5.5 (via apt upgrade) > - umount volumes > - mount volumes > > Interestingly the log entries still refer to version 5.3: > > [2019-03-20 08:38:31.880132] W [dict.c:761:dict_ref] > (-->/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/glusterfs/5.3/xlator/performance/quick-read.so(+0x6df4) > [0x7f35f214ddf4] > -->/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/glusterfs/5.3/xlator/performance/io-cache.so(+0xa39d) > [0x7f35f235f39d] > -->/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libglusterfs.so.0(dict_ref+0x58) > [0x7f35f9403a38] ) 11-dict: dict is NULL [Invalid argument] > > First i thought there could be old processes running/hanging on these > 3 clients, but I see that there are 4 processes (for 2 volumes) > running on all clients: > > root 11234 0.0 0.2 1858720 580964 ? Ssl Mar11 7:23 > /usr/sbin/glusterfs --attribute-timeout=0 --entry-timeout=0 > --lru-limit=0 --process-name fuse --volfile-server=gluster1 > --volfile-id=/persistent /data/repository/shared/private > root 11323 0.6 2.5 10061536 6788940 ? Ssl Mar11 77:42 > /usr/sbin/glusterfs --attribute-timeout=0 --entry-timeout=0 > --lru-limit=0 --process-name fuse --volfile-server=gluster1 > --volfile-id=/workdata /data/repository/shared/public > root 11789 0.0 0.0 874116 11076 ? Ssl 07:32 0:00 > /usr/sbin/glusterfs --attribute-timeout=0 --entry-timeout=0 > --process-name fuse --volfile-server=gluster1 --volfile-id=/persistent > /data/repository/shared/private > root 11881 0.0 0.0 874116 10992 ? Ssl 07:32 0:00 > /usr/sbin/glusterfs --attribute-timeout=0 --entry-timeout=0 > --process-name fuse --volfile-server=gluster1 --volfile-id=/workdata > /data/repository/shared/public > > The first 2 processes are for the "old" mount (with lru-limit=0), the > last 2 processes are for the "new" mount. But only 3 clients still > have these entries. Systems are running fine, no problems so far. > Maybe wrong order of the update? If i look at > https://docs.gluster.org/en/latest/Upgrade-Guide/upgrade_to_4.1/ - > then it would be better to: unmount - upgrade - mount? > > > Best regards, > Hubert > > Am Di., 19. März 2019 um 15:53 Uhr schrieb Artem Russakovskii > <archon810@xxxxxxxxx>: > > > > The flood is indeed fixed for us on 5.5. However, the crashes are not. > > > > Sincerely, > > Artem > > > > -- > > Founder, Android Police, APK Mirror, Illogical Robot LLC > > beerpla.net | +ArtemRussakovskii | @ArtemR > > > > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 5:41 AM Hu Bert <revirii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Hi Amar, > >> > >> if you refer to this bug: > >> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1674225 : in the test > >> setup i haven't seen those entries, while copying & deleting a few GBs > >> of data. For a final statement we have to wait until i updated our > >> live gluster servers - could take place on tuesday or wednesday. > >> > >> Maybe other users can do an update to 5.4 as well and report back here. > >> > >> > >> Hubert > >> > >> > >> > >> Am Mo., 18. März 2019 um 11:36 Uhr schrieb Amar Tumballi Suryanarayan > >> <atumball@xxxxxxxxxx>: > >> > > >> > Hi Hu Bert, > >> > > >> > Appreciate the feedback. Also are the other boiling issues related to logs fixed now? > >> > > >> > -Amar > >> > > >> > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 3:54 PM Hu Bert <revirii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> update: upgrade from 5.3 -> 5.5 in a replicate 3 test setup with 2 > >> >> volumes done. In 'gluster peer status' the peers stay connected during > >> >> the upgrade, no 'peer rejected' messages. No cksum mismatches in the > >> >> logs. Looks good :-) > >> >> > >> >> Am Mo., 18. März 2019 um 09:54 Uhr schrieb Hu Bert <revirii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > >> >> > > >> >> > Good morning :-) > >> >> > > >> >> > for debian the packages are there: > >> >> > https://download.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/5/5.5/Debian/stretch/amd64/apt/pool/main/g/glusterfs/ > >> >> > > >> >> > I'll do an upgrade of a test installation 5.3 -> 5.5 and see if there > >> >> > are some errors etc. and report back. > >> >> > > >> >> > btw: no release notes for 5.4 and 5.5 so far? > >> >> > https://docs.gluster.org/en/latest/release-notes/ ? > >> >> > > >> >> > Am Fr., 15. März 2019 um 14:28 Uhr schrieb Shyam Ranganathan > >> >> > <srangana@xxxxxxxxxx>: > >> >> > > > >> >> > > We created a 5.5 release tag, and it is under packaging now. It should > >> >> > > be packaged and ready for testing early next week and should be released > >> >> > > close to mid-week next week. > >> >> > > > >> >> > > Thanks, > >> >> > > Shyam > >> >> > > On 3/13/19 12:34 PM, Artem Russakovskii wrote: > >> >> > > > Wednesday now with no update :-/ > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Sincerely, > >> >> > > > Artem > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > -- > >> >> > > > Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror > >> >> > > > <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC > >> >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | +ArtemRussakovskii > >> >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR > >> >> > > > <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 10:28 AM Artem Russakovskii <archon810@xxxxxxxxx > >> >> > > > <mailto:archon810@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Hi Amar, > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Any updates on this? I'm still not seeing it in OpenSUSE build > >> >> > > > repos. Maybe later today? > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Thanks. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Sincerely, > >> >> > > > Artem > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > -- > >> >> > > > Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror > >> >> > > > <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC > >> >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | +ArtemRussakovskii > >> >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR > >> >> > > > <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 10:30 PM Amar Tumballi Suryanarayan > >> >> > > > <atumball@xxxxxxxxxx <mailto:atumball@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > We are talking days. Not weeks. Considering already it is > >> >> > > > Thursday here. 1 more day for tagging, and packaging. May be ok > >> >> > > > to expect it on Monday. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > -Amar > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 11:54 AM Artem Russakovskii > >> >> > > > <archon810@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:archon810@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Is the next release going to be an imminent hotfix, i.e. > >> >> > > > something like today/tomorrow, or are we talking weeks? > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Sincerely, > >> >> > > > Artem > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > -- > >> >> > > > Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK > >> >> > > > Mirror <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC > >> >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | +ArtemRussakovskii > >> >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR > >> >> > > > <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 11:09 AM Artem Russakovskii > >> >> > > > <archon810@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:archon810@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Ended up downgrading to 5.3 just in case. Peer status > >> >> > > > and volume status are OK now. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > zypper install --oldpackage glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1 > >> >> > > > Loading repository data... > >> >> > > > Reading installed packages... > >> >> > > > Resolving package dependencies... > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Problem: glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 requires > >> >> > > > libgfapi0 = 5.3, but this requirement cannot be provided > >> >> > > > not installable providers: > >> >> > > > libgfapi0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64[glusterfs] > >> >> > > > Solution 1: Following actions will be done: > >> >> > > > downgrade of libgfapi0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to > >> >> > > > libgfapi0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 > >> >> > > > downgrade of libgfchangelog0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to > >> >> > > > libgfchangelog0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 > >> >> > > > downgrade of libgfrpc0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to > >> >> > > > libgfrpc0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 > >> >> > > > downgrade of libgfxdr0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to > >> >> > > > libgfxdr0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 > >> >> > > > downgrade of libglusterfs0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to > >> >> > > > libglusterfs0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 > >> >> > > > Solution 2: do not install glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 > >> >> > > > Solution 3: break glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 by > >> >> > > > ignoring some of its dependencies > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Choose from above solutions by number or cancel > >> >> > > > [1/2/3/c] (c): 1 > >> >> > > > Resolving dependencies... > >> >> > > > Resolving package dependencies... > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > The following 6 packages are going to be downgraded: > >> >> > > > glusterfs libgfapi0 libgfchangelog0 libgfrpc0 > >> >> > > > libgfxdr0 libglusterfs0 > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > 6 packages to downgrade. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Sincerely, > >> >> > > > Artem > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > -- > >> >> > > > Founder, Android Police > >> >> > > > <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror > >> >> > > > <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC > >> >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | +ArtemRussakovskii > >> >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR > >> >> > > > <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 10:57 AM Artem Russakovskii > >> >> > > > <archon810@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:archon810@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Noticed the same when upgrading from 5.3 to 5.4, as > >> >> > > > mentioned. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > I'm confused though. Is actual replication affected, > >> >> > > > because the 5.4 server and the 3x 5.3 servers still > >> >> > > > show heal info as all 4 connected, and the files > >> >> > > > seem to be replicating correctly as well. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > So what's actually affected - just the status > >> >> > > > command, or leaving 5.4 on one of the nodes is doing > >> >> > > > some damage to the underlying fs? Is it fixable by > >> >> > > > tweaking transport.socket.ssl-enabled? Does > >> >> > > > upgrading all servers to 5.4 resolve it, or should > >> >> > > > we revert back to 5.3? > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Sincerely, > >> >> > > > Artem > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > -- > >> >> > > > Founder, Android Police > >> >> > > > <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror > >> >> > > > <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC > >> >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | > >> >> > > > +ArtemRussakovskii > >> >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> > >> >> > > > | @ArtemR <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 2:02 AM Hu Bert > >> >> > > > <revirii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> >> > > > <mailto:revirii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > fyi: did a downgrade 5.4 -> 5.3 and it worked. > >> >> > > > all replicas are up and > >> >> > > > running. Awaiting updated v5.4. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > thx :-) > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 09:26 Uhr schrieb Hari > >> >> > > > Gowtham <hgowtham@xxxxxxxxxx > >> >> > > > <mailto:hgowtham@xxxxxxxxxx>>: > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > There are plans to revert the patch causing > >> >> > > > this error and rebuilt 5.4. > >> >> > > > > This should happen faster. the rebuilt 5.4 > >> >> > > > should be void of this upgrade issue. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > In the meantime, you can use 5.3 for this cluster. > >> >> > > > > Downgrading to 5.3 will work if it was just > >> >> > > > one node that was upgrade to 5.4 > >> >> > > > > and the other nodes are still in 5.3. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 1:07 PM Hu Bert > >> >> > > > <revirii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> >> > > > <mailto:revirii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > Hi Hari, > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > thx for the hint. Do you know when this will > >> >> > > > be fixed? Is a downgrade > >> >> > > > > > 5.4 -> 5.3 a possibility to fix this? > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > Hubert > >> >> > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 08:32 Uhr schrieb > >> >> > > > Hari Gowtham <hgowtham@xxxxxxxxxx > >> >> > > > <mailto:hgowtham@xxxxxxxxxx>>: > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > Hi, > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > This is a known issue we are working on. > >> >> > > > > > > As the checksum differs between the > >> >> > > > updated and non updated node, the > >> >> > > > > > > peers are getting rejected. > >> >> > > > > > > The bricks aren't coming because of the > >> >> > > > same issue. > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > More about the issue: > >> >> > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685120 > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 12:56 PM Hu Bert > >> >> > > > <revirii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> >> > > > <mailto:revirii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Interestingly: gluster volume status > >> >> > > > misses gluster1, while heal > >> >> > > > > > > > statistics show gluster1: > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > gluster volume status workdata > >> >> > > > > > > > Status of volume: workdata > >> >> > > > > > > > Gluster process > >> >> > > > TCP Port RDMA Port Online Pid > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> >> > > > > > > > Brick gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> >> > > > 49153 0 Y 1723 > >> >> > > > > > > > Brick gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> >> > > > 49153 0 Y 2068 > >> >> > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost > >> >> > > > N/A N/A Y 1732 > >> >> > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on gluster3 > >> >> > > > N/A N/A Y 2077 > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > vs. > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > gluster volume heal workdata statistics > >> >> > > > heal-count > >> >> > > > > > > > Gathering count of entries to be healed > >> >> > > > on volume workdata has been successful > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Brick gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> >> > > > > > > > Number of entries: 0 > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Brick gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> >> > > > > > > > Number of entries: 10745 > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Brick gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> >> > > > > > > > Number of entries: 10744 > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 08:18 Uhr > >> >> > > > schrieb Hu Bert <revirii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> >> > > > <mailto:revirii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>>: > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Hi Miling, > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > well, there are such entries, but > >> >> > > > those haven't been a problem during > >> >> > > > > > > > > install and the last kernel > >> >> > > > update+reboot. The entries look like: > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > PUBLIC_IP gluster2.alpserver.de > >> >> > > > <http://gluster2.alpserver.de> gluster2 > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.50 gluster1 > >> >> > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.51 gluster2 > >> >> > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.52 gluster3 > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > 'ping gluster2' resolves to LAN IP; I > >> >> > > > removed the last entry in the > >> >> > > > > > > > > 1st line, did a reboot ... no, didn't > >> >> > > > help. From > >> >> > > > > > > > > /var/log/glusterfs/glusterd.log > >> >> > > > > > > > > on gluster 2: > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > [2019-03-05 07:04:36.188128] E [MSGID: > >> >> > > > 106010] > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > [glusterd-utils.c:3483:glusterd_compare_friend_volume] > >> >> > > > 0-management: > >> >> > > > > > > > > Version of Cksums persistent differ. > >> >> > > > local cksum = 3950307018, remote > >> >> > > > > > > > > cksum = 455409345 on peer gluster1 > >> >> > > > > > > > > [2019-03-05 07:04:36.188314] I [MSGID: > >> >> > > > 106493] > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > [glusterd-handler.c:3843:glusterd_xfer_friend_add_resp] > >> >> > > > 0-glusterd: > >> >> > > > > > > > > Responded to gluster1 (0), ret: 0, > >> >> > > > op_ret: -1 > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Interestingly there are no entries in > >> >> > > > the brick logs of the rejected > >> >> > > > > > > > > server. Well, not surprising as no > >> >> > > > brick process is running. The > >> >> > > > > > > > > server gluster1 is still in rejected > >> >> > > > state. > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > 'gluster volume start workdata force' > >> >> > > > starts the brick process on > >> >> > > > > > > > > gluster1, and some heals are happening > >> >> > > > on gluster2+3, but via 'gluster > >> >> > > > > > > > > volume status workdata' the volumes > >> >> > > > still aren't complete. > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > gluster1: > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> >> > > > > > > > > Brick gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> >> > > > 49152 0 Y 2523 > >> >> > > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost > >> >> > > > N/A N/A Y 2549 > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > gluster2: > >> >> > > > > > > > > Gluster process > >> >> > > > TCP Port RDMA Port Online Pid > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> >> > > > > > > > > Brick gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> >> > > > 49153 0 Y 1723 > >> >> > > > > > > > > Brick gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> >> > > > 49153 0 Y 2068 > >> >> > > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost > >> >> > > > N/A N/A Y 1732 > >> >> > > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on gluster3 > >> >> > > > N/A N/A Y 2077 > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Hubert > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 07:58 Uhr > >> >> > > > schrieb Milind Changire <mchangir@xxxxxxxxxx > >> >> > > > <mailto:mchangir@xxxxxxxxxx>>: > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > There are probably DNS entries or > >> >> > > > /etc/hosts entries with the public IP Addresses > >> >> > > > that the host names (gluster1, gluster2, > >> >> > > > gluster3) are getting resolved to. > >> >> > > > > > > > > > /etc/resolv.conf would tell which is > >> >> > > > the default domain searched for the node names > >> >> > > > and the DNS servers which respond to the queries. > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 12:14 PM Hu > >> >> > > > Bert <revirii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >> >> > > > <mailto:revirii@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Good morning, > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> i have a replicate 3 setup with 2 > >> >> > > > volumes, running on version 5.3 on > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> debian stretch. This morning i > >> >> > > > upgraded one server to version 5.4 and > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> rebooted the machine; after the > >> >> > > > restart i noticed that: > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> - no brick process is running > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> - gluster volume status only shows > >> >> > > > the server itself: > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> gluster volume status workdata > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Status of volume: workdata > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Gluster process > >> >> > > > TCP Port RDMA Port Online Pid > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Brick > >> >> > > > gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata N/A > >> >> > > > N/A N N/A > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> NFS Server on localhost > >> >> > > > N/A N/A N N/A > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> - gluster peer status on the server > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> gluster peer status > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Number of Peers: 2 > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster3 > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Uuid: > >> >> > > > c7b4a448-ca6a-4051-877f-788f9ee9bc4a > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected (Connected) > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster2 > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Uuid: > >> >> > > > 162fea82-406a-4f51-81a3-e90235d8da27 > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected (Connected) > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> - gluster peer status on the other > >> >> > > > 2 servers: > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> gluster peer status > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Number of Peers: 2 > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster1 > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Uuid: > >> >> > > > 9a360776-7b58-49ae-831e-a0ce4e4afbef > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected (Connected) > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster3 > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Uuid: > >> >> > > > c7b4a448-ca6a-4051-877f-788f9ee9bc4a > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> State: Peer in Cluster (Connected) > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> I noticed that, in the brick logs, > >> >> > > > i see that the public IP is used > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> instead of the LAN IP. brick logs > >> >> > > > from one of the volumes: > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> rejected node: > >> >> > > > https://pastebin.com/qkpj10Sd > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> connected nodes: > >> >> > > > https://pastebin.com/8SxVVYFV > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Why is the public IP suddenly used > >> >> > > > instead of the LAN IP? Killing all > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> gluster processes and rebooting > >> >> > > > (again) didn't help. > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Thx, > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Hubert > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Gluster-users mailing list > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx > >> >> > > > <mailto:Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> >> > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > -- > >> >> > > > > > > > > > Milind > >> >> > > > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> >> > > > > > > > Gluster-users mailing list > >> >> > > > > > > > Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx > >> >> > > > <mailto:Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > -- > >> >> > > > > > > Regards, > >> >> > > > > > > Hari Gowtham. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > -- > >> >> > > > > Regards, > >> >> > > > > Hari Gowtham. > >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> >> > > > Gluster-users mailing list > >> >> > > > Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx > >> >> > > > <mailto:Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> >> > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> >> > > > Gluster-users mailing list > >> >> > > > Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> >> > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > -- > >> >> > > > Amar Tumballi (amarts) > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> >> > > > Gluster-users mailing list > >> >> > > > Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx > >> >> > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> >> > > Gluster-users mailing list > >> >> > > Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx > >> >> > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Amar Tumballi (amarts) _______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
