Thanks Kotresh. Let me discuss in my team and will let you know.
Regards, Abhishek On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Kotresh Hiremath Ravishankar < khire...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hi Abhishek, > > As this is an enhancement it won't be back ported to 3.7/3.8/3.10 > It would be only available from upcoming 3.11 release. > > But I did try applying it to 3.7.6. It has lot of conflicts. > If it's important for you, you can upgrade to latest version. > available and back port it. If it's impossible to upgrade to > latest version, atleast 3.7.20 would do. It has minimal > conflicts. I can help you out with that. > > Thanks and Regards, > Kotresh H R > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "ABHISHEK PALIWAL" <abhishpali...@gmail.com> > > To: "Kotresh Hiremath Ravishankar" <khire...@redhat.com> > > Cc: "Pranith Kumar Karampuri" <pkara...@redhat.com>, "Gluster Devel" < > gluster-de...@gluster.org>, "gluster-users" > > <gluster-users@gluster.org> > > Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 10:58:41 AM > > Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] High load on glusterfsd process > > > > Hi Kotresh, > > > > Could you please update whether it is possible to get the patch or > bakport > > this patch on Gluster 3.7.6 version. > > > > Regards, > > Abhishek > > > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 6:14 PM, ABHISHEK PALIWAL < > abhishpali...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > What is the way to take this patch on Gluster 3.7.6 or only way to > upgrade > > > the version? > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 3:22 PM, ABHISHEK PALIWAL < > abhishpali...@gmail.com > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Kotresh, > > >> > > >> I have seen the patch available on the link which you shared. It > seems we > > >> don't have some files in gluser 3.7.6 which you modified in the patch. > > >> > > >> Is there any possibility to provide the patch for Gluster 3.7.6? > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> Abhishek > > >> > > >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 3:07 PM, Kotresh Hiremath Ravishankar < > > >> khire...@redhat.com> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Hi Abhishek, > > >>> > > >>> Bitrot requires versioning of files to be down on writes. > > >>> This was being done irrespective of whether bitrot is > > >>> enabled or not. This takes considerable CPU. With the > > >>> fix https://review.gluster.org/#/c/14442/, it is made > > >>> optional and is enabled only with bitrot. If bitrot > > >>> is not enabled, then you won't see any setxattr/getxattrs > > >>> related to bitrot. > > >>> > > >>> The fix would be available in 3.11. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Thanks and Regards, > > >>> Kotresh H R > > >>> > > >>> ----- Original Message ----- > > >>> > From: "ABHISHEK PALIWAL" <abhishpali...@gmail.com> > > >>> > To: "Pranith Kumar Karampuri" <pkara...@redhat.com> > > >>> > Cc: "Gluster Devel" <gluster-de...@gluster.org>, "gluster-users" < > > >>> gluster-users@gluster.org>, "Kotresh Hiremath > > >>> > Ravishankar" <khire...@redhat.com> > > >>> > Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 11:30:57 AM > > >>> > Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] High load on glusterfsd process > > >>> > > > >>> > Hi Kotresh, > > >>> > > > >>> > Could you please update me on this? > > >>> > > > >>> > Regards, > > >>> > Abhishek > > >>> > > > >>> > On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 12:31 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri < > > >>> > pkara...@redhat.com> wrote: > > >>> > > > >>> > > +Kotresh who seems to have worked on the bug you mentioned. > > >>> > > > > >>> > > On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 12:21 PM, ABHISHEK PALIWAL < > > >>> > > abhishpali...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> > > > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> If the patch provided in that case will resolve my bug as well > then > > >>> > >> please provide the patch so that I will backport it on 3.7.6 > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:30 AM, ABHISHEK PALIWAL < > > >>> > >> abhishpali...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >>> Hi Team, > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> I have noticed that there are so many glusterfsd threads are > > >>> running in > > >>> > >>> my system and we observed some of those thread consuming more > cpu. > > >>> I > > >>> > >>> did “strace” on two such threads (before the problem > disappeared by > > >>> > >>> itself) > > >>> > >>> and found that there is a continuous activity like below: > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> lstat("/opt/lvmdir/c2/brick/.glusterfs/e7/7d/e77d12b3-92f8-4 > > >>> > >>> dfe-9a7f-246e901cbdf1/002700/firewall_-J208482-4000025_20170 > > >>> 126T113552+0000.log.gz", > > >>> > >>> {st_mode=S_IFREG|0670, st_size=1995, ...}) = 0 > > >>> > >>> lgetxattr("/opt/lvmdir/c2/brick/.glusterfs/e7/7d/e77d12b3-92 > > >>> > >>> f8-4dfe-9a7f-246e901cbdf1/002700/firewall_-J208482-4000025_2 > > >>> 0170126T113552+0000.log.gz", > > >>> > >>> "trusted.bit-rot.bad-file", 0x3fff81f58550, 255) = -1 ENODATA > (No > > >>> data > > >>> > >>> available) > > >>> > >>> lgetxattr("/opt/lvmdir/c2/brick/.glusterfs/e7/7d/e77d12b3-92 > > >>> > >>> f8-4dfe-9a7f-246e901cbdf1/002700/firewall_-J208482-4000025_2 > > >>> 0170126T113552+0000.log.gz", > > >>> > >>> "trusted.bit-rot.signature", 0x3fff81f58550, 255) = -1 ENODATA > (No > > >>> data > > >>> > >>> available) > > >>> > >>> lstat("/opt/lvmdir/c2/brick/.glusterfs/e7/7d/e77d12b3-92f8-4 > > >>> > >>> dfe-9a7f-246e901cbdf1/002700/tcli_-J208482-4000025_20170123T > > >>> 180550+0000.log.gz", > > >>> > >>> {st_mode=S_IFREG|0670, st_size=169, ...}) = 0 > > >>> > >>> lgetxattr("/opt/lvmdir/c2/brick/.glusterfs/e7/7d/e77d12b3-92 > > >>> > >>> f8-4dfe-9a7f-246e901cbdf1/002700/tcli_-J208482-4000025_20170 > > >>> 123T180550+0000.log.gz", > > >>> > >>> "trusted.bit-rot.bad-file", 0x3fff81f58550, 255) = -1 ENODATA > (No > > >>> data > > >>> > >>> available) > > >>> > >>> lgetxattr("/opt/lvmdir/c2/brick/.glusterfs/e7/7d/e77d12b3-92 > > >>> > >>> f8-4dfe-9a7f-246e901cbdf1/002700/tcli_-J208482-4000025_20170 > > >>> 123T180550+0000.log.gz", > > >>> > >>> "trusted.bit-rot.signature", 0x3fff81f58550, 255) = -1 ENODATA > (No > > >>> data > > >>> > >>> available) > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> I have found the below existing issue which is very similar to > my > > >>> > >>> scenario. > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1298258 > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> We are using the gluster-3.7.6 and it seems that the issue is > > >>> fixed in > > >>> > >>> 3.8.4 version. > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> Could you please let me know why it showing the number of above > > >>> logs and > > >>> > >>> reason behind it as it is not explained in the above bug. > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> Regards, > > >>> > >>> Abhishek > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> -- > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> Regards > > >>> > >>> Abhishek Paliwal > > >>> > >>> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> -- > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> Regards > > >>> > >> Abhishek Paliwal > > >>> > >> > > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > > >>> > >> Gluster-users mailing list > > >>> > >> Gluster-users@gluster.org > > >>> > >> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > > >>> > >> > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > -- > > >>> > > Pranith > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > -- > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > Regards > > >>> > Abhishek Paliwal > > >>> > > > >>> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Regards > > >> Abhishek Paliwal > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > > Abhishek Paliwal > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > Regards > > Abhishek Paliwal > > > -- Regards Abhishek Paliwal
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list Gluster-users@gluster.org http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users