Re: [Gluster-devel] About split-brain-resolution.t

2015-04-08 Thread Anuradha Talur


- Original Message -
 From: Emmanuel Dreyfus m...@netbsd.org
 To: Anuradha Talur ata...@redhat.com, Pranith Kumar Karampuri 
 pkara...@redhat.com
 Cc: gluster-devel@gluster.org
 Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 9:55:24 PM
 Subject: Re: [Gluster-devel] About split-brain-resolution.t
 
 Anuradha Talur ata...@redhat.com wrote:
 
  1) I send a patch today to revert the .t and send it again along with the
  fix.
  Or...
  2) Can this be failure be ignored till the fix is merged in?
 
 We can ignore: NetBSD regresssion skips the test for now.
Hi,
I've sent a patch to fix this issue, it is currently being reviewed : 
http://review.gluster.org/#/c/10134/ .
 
 --
 Emmanuel Dreyfus
 http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
 m...@netbsd.org
 

-- 
Thanks,
Anuradha.
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel


Re: [Gluster-devel] About split-brain-resolution.t

2015-03-31 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
Anuradha Talur ata...@redhat.com wrote:

 1) I send a patch today to revert the .t and send it again along with the fix.
 Or...
 2) Can this be failure be ignored till the fix is merged in?

We can ignore: NetBSD regresssion skips the test for now.

-- 
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
m...@netbsd.org
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel


Re: [Gluster-devel] About split-brain-resolution.t

2015-03-30 Thread Pranith Kumar Karampuri


On 03/30/2015 06:01 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:

On Mon, Mar 30, 2015 at 05:44:23PM +0530, Pranith Kumar Karampuri wrote:

Problem here is that ' inode_forget' is coming even before it gets to
inspect the file. We initially thought we should 'ref' the inode when the
user specifies the choice and 'unref' it at the time of 'finalize' or
'abort' of the operation. But that may lead to un-necessary leaks when the
user forgets to do either finalize/abort the operation. One way to get
around it is to ref the inode for some 'pre-determined time' when 'choice'
is given.

That suggests the design is not finalized ans the implementation ought to
have unwanted behaviors. IMO the test should be retired until the design
and implementation is completed.
I will work with Anuradha tomorrow about this one and either send a 
patch to remove the .t file or send the fix which makes things right.


Pranith




___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel


Re: [Gluster-devel] About split-brain-resolution.t

2015-03-30 Thread Pranith Kumar Karampuri


On 03/30/2015 06:34 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:

Pranith Kumar Karampuri pkara...@redhat.com wrote:


Since spb_choice is not saved as an attribute for the file on the
bricks, it cannot be recovered when the context is reallocated. Either
that save feature has been forgotten, or going to afr_destroy() here
is a bug. Here is the backtrace leading there:

This is a known issue :-(. I will need to talk to Anuradha once about
this issue. She is not in today. Will let you know about the decision.

It seems the thing arise because a threads quits and decide to cleanup
stuff. Do we have an idea what this thread is? For the test to pass we
need to keep the thread alive.

Of course that works around a real problem. Why don't we immediatly
clear pending xattr when replica.split-brain-choice is set? That would
clear the split brain state.

this is how the feature is supposed to work:
https://github.com/gluster/glusterfs/blob/master/doc/features/heal-info-and-split-brain-resolution.md

Basically the choice is given to inspect the 'data' of the file. Then 
one can finalize the choice which will clear the pending xattrs after 
resolving the split-brain.
Problem here is that ' inode_forget' is coming even before it gets to 
inspect the file. We initially thought we should 'ref' the inode when 
the user specifies the choice and 'unref' it at the time of 'finalize' 
or 'abort' of the operation. But that may lead to un-necessary leaks 
when the user forgets to do either finalize/abort the operation. One way 
to get around it is to ref the inode for some 'pre-determined time' when 
'choice' is given.


Pranith




___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel


Re: [Gluster-devel] About split-brain-resolution.t

2015-03-28 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
Pranith Kumar Karampuri pkara...@redhat.com wrote:

  I see split-brain-resolution.t uses attribute replica.split-brain-choice
  to choose what replica should be used. This attribute is not in
  privilegied space (trusted. prefixed). Is it on purpose?
 Yes, these are used as internal commands to make a choice when file is
 in split-brain.

Sure, but since it is not privilegied namespace, it means unprivilegied
user can fiddle with it.

-- 
Emmanuel Dreyfus
http://hcpnet.free.fr/pubz
m...@netbsd.org
___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel


Re: [Gluster-devel] About split-brain-resolution.t

2015-03-28 Thread Pranith Kumar Karampuri


On 03/28/2015 09:51 PM, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:

Hi

I see split-brain-resolution.t uses attribute replica.split-brain-choice
to choose what replica should be used. This attribute is not in
privilegied space (trusted. prefixed). Is it on purpose?
Yes, these are used as internal commands to make a choice when file is 
in split-brain.


While there, just in case someone has an idea on this: on NetBSD setting
this attribute is ignored. The brick gets some request but does not set
the attribute. Not yet investigated, but just in case someone has an
idea...

Yes it is treated as command and not set on the file.




___
Gluster-devel mailing list
Gluster-devel@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel