Hi Anthony,
On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 8:27 AM Anthony Hoppe <anthony@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
Ok! I'm actually poking at this now, so great timing.
The only mistake I made, I believe, was I expanded the last shard to
64MB. I forgot that bit. I'm going to try again leaving that one as
is. Otherwise here is what my process has been so far. It may be a bit
roundabout but here it is:
1) copy main file + shards from each node to directories on recovery storage
2) separate empty and non-empty files
3) compare non-empty files (diff -q the directories) for discrepancies
If everything seems to check out:
4) combine empty files into one directory overwriting dupes
5) combine non-empty files into one directory overwriting dupes
6) expand all files not already 64 MB to 64 MB, except last shard.
7) create a numerically sorted list of files
8) spot check sort list and append shard 0 to top of list if necessary.
I guess this means identifying missing shards and creating them with 64 MiB. If so, that's fine.
Shard 0 is the main file and needs to be there always.
9) cat everything together reading from sorted list.
Does this sound more or less like I'm going down the right path?
Yes, it should work.
Xavi
Thanks!
On 9/8/21 11:18 PM, Xavi Hernandez wrote:
> Hi Anthony,
>
> On Wed, Sep 8, 2021 at 6:11 PM Anthony Hoppe <anthony@xxxxxxxx
> <mailto:anthony@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
> Hi Xavi,
>
> I am working with a distributred-replicated volume. What I've been
> doing is copying the shards from each node to their own "recovery"
> directory, discarding shards that are 0 bytes, then comparing the
> remainder and combining unique shards into a common directory. Then
> I'd build a sorted list so the shards are sorted numerically adding
> the "main file" to the top of the list and then have cat run through
> the list. I had one pair of shards that diff told me were not
> equal, but their byte size was equivalent. In that case, I'm not
> sure which is the "correct" shard, but I'd note that and just pick
> one with the intention of circling back if cat'ing things together
> didn't work out...which so far I haven't had any luck.
>
>
> If there's a shard with different contents probably it has a pending
> heal. If it's a replica 3, most probably 2 of the files should match. In
> that case this should be the "good" version. Otherwise you will need to
> check the stat and extended attributes of the files from each brick to
> see which one is the best.
>
>
> How can I identify if a shard is not full size? I haven't checked
> every single shard, but they seem to be 64 MB in size. Would that
> mean I need to make sure all but the last shard is 64 MB? I suspect
> this might be my issue.
>
>
> If you are using the default shard size, they should be 64 MiB (i.e.
> 67108864 bytes). Any file smaller than that (including the main file,
> but not the last shard) must be expanded to this size (truncate -s
> 67108864 <file>). All shards must exist (from 1 to last number). If one
> is missing you need to create it (touch <file> && truncate -s 67108864
> <file>).
>
>
> Also, is shard 0 what would appear as the actual file (so
> largefile.raw or whatever)? It seems in my scenario these files are
> ~48 MB. I assume that means I need to extend it to 64 MB?
>
>
> Yes, shard 0 is the main file, and it also needs to be extended to 64 MiB.
>
> Regards,
>
> Xavi
>
>
> This is all great information. Thanks!
>
> ~ Anthony
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From: *"Xavi Hernandez" <jahernan@xxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:jahernan@xxxxxxxxxx>>
> *To: *"anthony" <anthony@xxxxxxxx <mailto:anthony@xxxxxxxx>>
> *Cc: *"gluster-users" <gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> *Sent: *Wednesday, September 8, 2021 1:57:51 AM
> *Subject: *Re: Recovering from remove-brick
> where shards did not rebalance
>
> Hi Anthony,
>
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 8:20 PM Anthony Hoppe <anthony@xxxxxxxx
> <mailto:anthony@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:
>
> I am currently playing with concatenating main file + shards
> together. Is it safe to assume that a shard with the same
> ID and sequence number
> (5da7d7b9-7ff3-48d2-8dcd-4939364bda1f.242 for example) is
> identical across bricks? That is, I can copy all the shards
> into a single location overwriting and/or discarding
> duplicates, then concatenate them together in order? Or is
> it a more complex?
>
>
> Assuming it's a replicated volume, a given shard should appear
> on all bricks of the same replicated subvolume. If there were no
> pending heals, they should all have the same contents (however
> you can easily check that by running an md5sum (or similar) on
> each file).
>
> On distributed-replicated volumes it's possible to have the same
> shard on two different subvolumes. In this case one of the
> subvolumes contains the real file, and the other a special
> 0-bytes file with mode '---------T'. You need to take the real
> file and ignore the second one.
>
> Shards may be smaller than the shard size. In this case you
> should extend the shard to the shard size before concatenating
> it with the rest of the shards (for example using "truncate
> -s"). The last shard may be smaller. It doesn't need to be extended.
>
> Once you have all the shards, you can concatenate them. Note
> that the first shard of a file (or shard 0) is not inside the
> .shard directory. You must take it from the location where the
> file is normally seen.
>
> Regards,
>
> Xavi
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From: *"anthony" <anthony@xxxxxxxx
> <mailto:anthony@xxxxxxxx>>
> *To: *"gluster-users" <gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, September 7, 2021 10:18:07 AM
> *Subject: *Re: Recovering from
> remove-brick where shards did not rebalance
>
> I've been playing with re-adding the bricks and here is
> some interesting behavior.
>
> When I try to force add the bricks to the volume while
> it's running, I get complaints about one of the bricks
> already being a member of a volume. If I stop the
> volume, I can then force-add the bricks. However, the
> volume won't start without force. Once the volume is
> force started, all of the bricks remain offline.
>
> I feel like I'm close...but not quite there...
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From: *"anthony" <anthony@xxxxxxxx
> <mailto:anthony@xxxxxxxx>>
> *To: *"Strahil Nikolov" <hunter86_bg@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:hunter86_bg@xxxxxxxxx>>
> *Cc: *"gluster-users" <gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, September 7, 2021 7:45:44 AM
> *Subject: *Re: Recovering from
> remove-brick where shards did not rebalance
>
> I was contemplating these options, actually, but not
> finding anything in my research showing someone had
> tried either before gave me pause.
>
> One thing I wasn't sure about when doing a force
> add-brick was if gluster would wipe the existing
> data from the added bricks. Sounds like that may
> not be the case?
>
> With regards to concatenating the main file +
> shards, how would I go about identifying the shards
> that pair with the main file? I see the shards have
> sequence numbers, but I'm not sure how to match the
> identifier to the main file.
>
> Thanks!!
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From: *"Strahil Nikolov" <hunter86_bg@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:hunter86_bg@xxxxxxxxx>>
> *To: *"anthony" <anthony@xxxxxxxx
> <mailto:anthony@xxxxxxxx>>, "gluster-users"
> <gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>>
> *Sent: *Tuesday, September 7, 2021 6:02:36 AM
> *Subject: *Re: Recovering from
> remove-brick where shards did not rebalance
>
> The data should be recoverable by concatenating
> the main file with all shards. Then you can copy
> the data back via the FUSE mount point.
>
> I think that some users reported that add-brick
> with the force option allows to 'undo' the
> situation and 're-add' the data, but I have
> never tried that and I cannot guarantee that it
> will even work.
>
> The simplest way is to recover from a recent
> backup , but sometimes this leads to a data loss.
>
> Best Regards,
> Strahil Nikolov
>
> On Tue, Sep 7, 2021 at 9:29, Anthony Hoppe
> <anthony@xxxxxxxx <mailto:anthony@xxxxxxxx>>
> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I did a bad thing and did a remove-brick on
> a set of bricks in a distributed-replicate
> volume where rebalancing did not
> successfully rebalance all files. In
> sleuthing around the various bricks on the 3
> node pool, it appears that a number of the
> files within the volume may have been stored
> as shards. With that, I'm unsure how to
> proceed with recovery.
>
> Is it possible to re-add the removed bricks
> somehow and then do a heal? Or is there a
> way to recover data from shards somehow?
>
> Thanks!
> ________
>
>
>
> Community Meeting Calendar:
>
> Schedule -
> Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST /
> 09:00 UTC
> Bridge: https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk
> <https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk>
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> <https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users>
>
>
> ________
>
>
>
> Community Meeting Calendar:
>
> Schedule -
> Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC
> Bridge: https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk
> <https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk>
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> <https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users>
>
>
________ Community Meeting Calendar: Schedule - Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC Bridge: https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@xxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
