Re: [Gluster-users] gluster rebalance taking three months

[Changliang Chen]

Any help?

We notice that if the below errors appears,the rebalance fixed layout will
become very slow,the number just increase about 4 per five minutes.

E [rpc-clnt.c:199:call_bail] dfs-client-0: bailing out frame type(GlusterFS
3.1) op(INODELK(29)) xid = 0x755696 sent = 2011-10-20 06:20:51.217782.
timeout = 30

 W [afr-self-heal-common.c:584:afr_sh_pending_to_delta]
afr_sh_pending_to_delta: Unable to get dict value.

I [dht-common.c:369:dht_revalidate_cbk] dfs-dht: subvolume
19loudfs-replicate-2 returned -1 (Invalid argument)

On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Changliang Chen  wrote:

> Thanks Amar,but it looks like that the v3.1.1 hasn't support the command
>
> 'gluster volume rebalance dfs migrate-data start'
>
> # gluster volume rebalance dfs migrate-data start
> Usage: volume rebalance  
> Rebalance of Volume dfs failed
>
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Amar Tumballi  wrote:
>
>> Hi Chen,
>>
>> Can you restart the 'glusterd' and run 'gluster volume rebalance dfs
>> migrate-data start' and check if your data migration happens?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Amar
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 18, 2011 at 12:54 PM, Changliang Chen wrote:
>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> we have a rebalance running on eight  bricks since  July and this is
>>> what the status looks like right now:
>>>
>>> ===Tue Oct 18 13:45:01 CST 2011 
>>> rebalance step 1: layout fix in progress: fixed layout 223623
>>>
>>> There are roughly 8T photos in the storage,so how long should this
>>> rebalance take?
>>>
>>> What does the number (in this case) 22362 represent?
>>>
>>> Our gluster infomation:
>>> Repository revision: v3.1.1
>>> Volume Name: dfs
>>> Type: Distributed-Replicate
>>> Status: Started
>>> Number of Bricks: 4 x 2 = 8
>>> Transport-type: tcp
>>> Bricks:
>>> Brick1: 10.1.1.23:/data0
>>> Brick2: 10.1.1.24:/data0
>>> Brick3: 10.1.1.25:/data0
>>> Brick4: 10.1.1.26:/data0
>>> Brick5: 10.1.1.27:/data0
>>> Brick6: 10.1.1.28:/data0
>>> Brick7: 10.1.1.64:/data0
>>> Brick8: 10.1.1.65:/data0
>>> Options Reconfigured:
>>> cluster.min-free-disk: 10%
>>> network.ping-timeout: 25
>>> network.frame-timeout: 30
>>> performance.cache-max-file-size: 512KB
>>> performance.cache-size: 3GB
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Cocl
>>> OM manager
>>> 19lou Operation & Maintenance Dept
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>> Gluster-users@gluster.org
>>> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Cocl
> OM manager
> 19lou Operation & Maintenance Dept
>



-- 

Regards,

Cocl
OM manager
19lou Operation & Maintenance Dept
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] ACL

[Anush Shetty]

Hi Thai,

Yes, we do.

http://community.gluster.org/q/export-subdirectories-of-volumes-with-nfs/

-
Anush



From: Thai. Ngo Bao [tha...@vng.com.vn]
Sent: 21 October 2011 08:21:32
To: Anush Shetty; gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: RE: [Gluster-users] ACL

Hi Anush,

Thanks for the info. Also, I wonder if gluster concerns with some feature 
allowing glusterfs to export subdirectories for clients by gluster native 
protocol like NFS?

Thanks,
~Thai

From: Anush Shetty [mailto:an...@gluster.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 1:37 PM
To: Thai. Ngo Bao; gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: RE: [Gluster-users] ACL

Hi Thai,

As of now, there are no provisions to mount GlusterFS client as a normal user.

-
Anush

From: gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org [gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org] on 
behalf of Thai. Ngo Bao [tha...@vng.com.vn]
Sent: 20 October 2011 12:00:44
To: Anush Shetty; gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] ACL
Hi Anush,

Thanks for your response. I do know that there is almost no difference in 
behavior of these  2 cases (POSIX ACL) except the thing I concerned with by the 
test. Please correct me if I am wrong.
It turns out that glusterfs ACL has no effect if client mounts gluster volume 
under root user. That’s why I asked in previous email if we can anyhow force 
(from glusterfs servers) clients to mount under a normal user instead of root.

What do you think?

~Thai

From: Anush Shetty [mailto:an...@gluster.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 1:03 PM
To: Thai. Ngo Bao; gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: RE: [Gluster-users] ACL

Hi Thai,

Have you tried these steps without glusterfs in the picture? I see no 
difference in behaviour when tried directly on the backend filesystem.

-
Anush

From: Thai. Ngo Bao [tha...@vng.com.vn]
Sent: 20 October 2011 08:04:31
To: Anush Shetty; gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: RE: [Gluster-users] ACL
Hi Anush,

Thanks for your quick reply. There was no error when set ACL. Below is what I 
has done at Client Side:

1.   Under root user: mount –t glusterfs IP_server:/volume_name  –o acl  
/mnt

2.   Under root user at client, create a folder named thainb: mkdir –p 
/mnt/thainb

3.   Under root user: chown –R thainb:thainb /mnt/thainb

4.   Under root user: set  -m u:thainb:rw /mnt/thainb

5.   su thainb

6.   create some folder and file under thainb folder

7.   su peter

8.   remove file and folder

9.   Permission denied log from glusterfs:

[2011-10-20 08:58:17.603705] W [fuse-bridge.c:847:fuse_err_cbk] 
0-glusterfs-fuse: 2646: ACCESS() /thainb/readme => -1 (Permission denied)

[2011-10-20 08:58:19.7369] W [fuse-bridge.c:908:fuse_unlink_cbk] 
0-glusterfs-fuse: 2648: UNLINK() /thainb/readme => -1 (Permission denied)



10.   Exit su and under root user, remove file and folder

11.   No log from gluster

---snip-
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# su peter
[peter@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]$ ls -al
total 56
drwxrwxr-x+  3 thainb thainb 8192 Oct 20 08:56 .
drwxr-xr-x  26 root   root   8192 Oct 20 08:34 ..
-rw-rw-r--   1 thainb thainb6 Oct 20 08:56 readme
drwxrwxr-x   2 thainb thainb 8192 Oct 20 08:40 test

[peter@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]$ rm readme
rm: remove write-protected regular file `readme'? y
rm: cannot remove `readme': Permission denied
[peter@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]$ exit
exit
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# ls
readme  test
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# rm readme
rm: remove regular file `readme'? y
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# rm -f test
rm: cannot remove `test': Is a directory
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# rm -rf test
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# ls
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# getfacl .
# file: .
# owner: thainb
# group: thainb
user::rwx
user:thainb:rw-
group::r-x
mask::rwx
other::r-x

[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# pwd
/mnt/thainb
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# df -h
FilesystemSize  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda3  74G  7.1G   63G  11% /
/dev/sda1  99M   12M   82M  13% /boot
tmpfs 2.0G 0  2.0G   0% /dev/shm
/dev/sda3  74G  7.1G   63G  11% /data
glusterfs#lab3:/farm53   148G  9.5G  131G   7% /mnt

-end--

What do you suggest?

Thanks,
~Thai

From: Anush Shetty [mailto:an...@gluster.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 5:58 PM
To: Thai. Ngo Bao; gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: RE: [Gluster-users] ACL

Hi,

Do you see any error messages when you try to set ACL? Can you also paste the 
logs here?

-
Anush

From: gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org [gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org] on 
behalf of Thai. Ngo Bao [tha...@vng.com.vn]
Sent: 19 October 2011 16:16:36
To: gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: [Gluster-users] ACL
Hi,

I am testing gluster 3.2.4 with ACL on small linux cluster:


1.   All exports (bricks) mounted with –o acl option

2.   All the gluste

Re: [Gluster-users] ACL

[Thai. Ngo Bao]

Hi Anush,

Thanks for the info. Also, I wonder if gluster concerns with some feature 
allowing glusterfs to export subdirectories for clients by gluster native 
protocol like NFS?

Thanks,
~Thai

From: Anush Shetty [mailto:an...@gluster.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 1:37 PM
To: Thai. Ngo Bao; gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: RE: [Gluster-users] ACL

Hi Thai,

As of now, there are no provisions to mount GlusterFS client as a normal user.

-
Anush

From: gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org [gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org] on 
behalf of Thai. Ngo Bao [tha...@vng.com.vn]
Sent: 20 October 2011 12:00:44
To: Anush Shetty; gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] ACL
Hi Anush,

Thanks for your response. I do know that there is almost no difference in 
behavior of these  2 cases (POSIX ACL) except the thing I concerned with by the 
test. Please correct me if I am wrong.
It turns out that glusterfs ACL has no effect if client mounts gluster volume 
under root user. That's why I asked in previous email if we can anyhow force 
(from glusterfs servers) clients to mount under a normal user instead of root.

What do you think?

~Thai

From: Anush Shetty [mailto:an...@gluster.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 1:03 PM
To: Thai. Ngo Bao; gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: RE: [Gluster-users] ACL

Hi Thai,

Have you tried these steps without glusterfs in the picture? I see no 
difference in behaviour when tried directly on the backend filesystem.

-
Anush

From: Thai. Ngo Bao [tha...@vng.com.vn]
Sent: 20 October 2011 08:04:31
To: Anush Shetty; gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: RE: [Gluster-users] ACL
Hi Anush,

Thanks for your quick reply. There was no error when set ACL. Below is what I 
has done at Client Side:

1.   Under root user: mount -t glusterfs IP_server:/volume_name  -o acl  
/mnt

2.   Under root user at client, create a folder named thainb: mkdir -p 
/mnt/thainb

3.   Under root user: chown -R thainb:thainb /mnt/thainb

4.   Under root user: set  -m u:thainb:rw /mnt/thainb

5.   su thainb

6.   create some folder and file under thainb folder

7.   su peter

8.   remove file and folder

9.   Permission denied log from glusterfs:

[2011-10-20 08:58:17.603705] W [fuse-bridge.c:847:fuse_err_cbk] 
0-glusterfs-fuse: 2646: ACCESS() /thainb/readme => -1 (Permission denied)

[2011-10-20 08:58:19.7369] W [fuse-bridge.c:908:fuse_unlink_cbk] 
0-glusterfs-fuse: 2648: UNLINK() /thainb/readme => -1 (Permission denied)



10.   Exit su and under root user, remove file and folder

11.   No log from gluster

---snip-
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# su peter
[peter@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]$ ls -al
total 56
drwxrwxr-x+  3 thainb thainb 8192 Oct 20 08:56 .
drwxr-xr-x  26 root   root   8192 Oct 20 08:34 ..
-rw-rw-r--   1 thainb thainb6 Oct 20 08:56 readme
drwxrwxr-x   2 thainb thainb 8192 Oct 20 08:40 test

[peter@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]$ rm readme
rm: remove write-protected regular file `readme'? y
rm: cannot remove `readme': Permission denied
[peter@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]$ exit
exit
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# ls
readme  test
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# rm readme
rm: remove regular file `readme'? y
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# rm -f test
rm: cannot remove `test': Is a directory
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# rm -rf test
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# ls
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# getfacl .
# file: .
# owner: thainb
# group: thainb
user::rwx
user:thainb:rw-
group::r-x
mask::rwx
other::r-x

[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# pwd
/mnt/thainb
[root@GSO_DB_Local4 thainb]# df -h
FilesystemSize  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda3  74G  7.1G   63G  11% /
/dev/sda1  99M   12M   82M  13% /boot
tmpfs 2.0G 0  2.0G   0% /dev/shm
/dev/sda3  74G  7.1G   63G  11% /data
glusterfs#lab3:/farm53   148G  9.5G  131G   7% /mnt

-end--

What do you suggest?

Thanks,
~Thai

From: Anush Shetty [mailto:an...@gluster.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 5:58 PM
To: Thai. Ngo Bao; gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: RE: [Gluster-users] ACL

Hi,

Do you see any error messages when you try to set ACL? Can you also paste the 
logs here?

-
Anush

From: gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org [gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org] on 
behalf of Thai. Ngo Bao [tha...@vng.com.vn]
Sent: 19 October 2011 16:16:36
To: gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: [Gluster-users] ACL
Hi,

I am testing gluster 3.2.4 with ACL on small linux cluster:


1.   All exports (bricks) mounted with -o acl option

2.   All the glusterfs clients mounted with -o acl option

Acl works perfectly when clients mount under normal users but it will not work 
if clients mount under root user.  What am I missing? How can we force clients 
to mount under normal user rather than root user?

Thanks,
~Thai
_

Re: [Gluster-users] tons and tons of clients, oh my!

[Joe Landman]

On 10/20/2011 06:29 PM, Luis Cerezo wrote:

Hello gluster-verse!

I'm about to see if GlusterFS can handle a large amount of clients, this
was not at all in plans when we initially selected and setup our current
configuration.

What sort of experience do you (the collective "you" as in y'all) have
with a large client to storage brick server ratio? (~1330:1) Where do
you see things going awnry?


We've had up to 300 clients per brick ratios in the past.  For large 
files, we saw lots of contention.  Contention drastically reduces 
performance.



Most of this will be reads and locks on small files and dirs. our setup
is 3xstorage node servers in a pure distribute config.


You do not want to even consider small files ... this is not a good use 
case for a cluster file system in general.  The only real way to deal 
with this is to put your backing file system on SSD or Flash, and have a 
very fast network.  Even then performance is not going to be that good.



--
Joseph Landman, Ph.D
Founder and CEO
Scalable Informatics, Inc.
email: land...@scalableinformatics.com
web  : http://scalableinformatics.com
   http://scalableinformatics.com/sicluster
phone: +1 734 786 8423 x121
fax  : +1 866 888 3112
cell : +1 734 612 4615
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

[Gluster-users] tons and tons of clients, oh my!

[Luis Cerezo]

Hello gluster-verse!

I'm about to see if GlusterFS can handle a large amount of clients, this was 
not at all in plans when we initially selected and setup our current 
configuration.

What sort of experience do you (the collective "you" as in y'all) have with a 
large  client to storage brick server ratio? (~1330:1) Where do you see things 
going awnry?

Most of this will be reads and locks on small files and dirs. our setup is 
3xstorage node servers in a pure distribute config.

-luis
P.S. Yes I am a little nuts.

Luis E. Cerezo

http://www.luiscerezo.org
http://twitter.com/luiscerezo
http://flickr.com/photos/luiscerezo
Voice: 412 223 7396
Photo web store
http://photos.luiscerezo.org


gluster ___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] Optimal XFS formatting?

[Harshavardhana]

Basic thumb rule

RAID 5 , 64k stripe size, use the following.  If you have larger files
go further.

# xfs, 5 disks, 64K stripe, units in 512-byte sectors

mkfs -txfs -d sunit=$((64*2)) -d swidth=$((5*64*2))

Use for better memory alignment with Scheduler

echo "16" > /proc/sys/vm/page-cluster - and also don't forget to change

echo "256" > /sys/block//queue/nr_requests - which should be
twice the queue_depth.

-Harsha
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] Optimal XFS formatting?

[Papp Tamas]

On 10/20/2011 03:18 PM, Gerald Brandt wrote:

Hi,

Are there any 'optimal' settings for XFS formatting under GlusterFS?  The 
storage will be used for Virtual Disk storage, virtual disk size from 8GB to 
100 GB in size.

One of the VM's (separate gluster volume) will be running MSSQL server (4K 
reads and writes).  The other will be running file servers, etc).


hi,

Why do you use VM images for these IO demanding tasks?

Anyway, we use this script:

#!/bin/bash
BLOCKSIZE=4096 # Make sure this is in bytes
CHUNKSIZE=128  # Make sure this is in KiB
NUMSPINDLES=8
RAID_TYPE=6
RAID_DEVICE_NAME="/dev/sda4" # Specify device name for your RAID device
FSLABEL="gluster" # specify filesystem label for generating mkfs line here

case "$RAID_TYPE" in
0)
RAID_DISKS=${NUMSPINDLES};
;;
1)
RAID_DISKS=${NUMSPINDLES};
;;
10)
RAID_DISKS=${NUMSPINDLES};
;;
5)
RAID_DISKS=`echo "${NUMSPINDLES} - 1" | bc`;
;;
6)
RAID_DISKS=`echo "${NUMSPINDLES} - 2" | bc`;
;;
*)
echo "Please specify RAID_TYPE as one of: 0, 1, 10, 5, or 6."
exit
;;
esac

SUNIT=`echo "${CHUNKSIZE} * 1024 / 512" | bc`
SWIDTH=`echo "$RAID_DISKS * ${SUNIT}" | bc`

echo "System blocksize=${BLOCKSIZE}"
echo "Chunk Size=${CHUNKSIZE} KiB"
echo "NumSpindles=${NUMSPINDLES}"
echo "RAID Type=${RAID_TYPE}"
echo "RAID Disks (usable for data)=${RAID_DISKS}"
echo "Calculated values:"
echo "Stripe Unit=${SUNIT}"
echo -e "Stripe Width=${SWIDTH}\n"
echo "mkfs line:"
echo -e "mkfs.xfs -b size=${BLOCKSIZE} -d 
sunit=${SUNIT},swidth=${SWIDTH} -L ${FSLABEL} ${RAID_DEVICE_NAME}\n"

echo "mount line:"
echo -e "mount -o remount,sunit=${SUNIT},swidth=${SWIDTH}\n"
echo "Add these options to your /etc/fstab to make permanent:"
echo "sunit=${SUNIT},swidth=${SWIDTH}"


Corresponding fstab:

/dev/sda4/mnt/brick1xfs
delaylog,sunit=256,swidth=1536,logbufs=8,logbsize=256k,noatime,nodiratime
00



tamas
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] FW: Save the Date: Building New File Systems with GlusterFS Translators

[Jeff Darcy]

On 10/20/2011 03:15 PM, Whit Blauvelt wrote:
> What's the technical level required to build translators? What languages are
> appropriate? Is this a capability that is likely to be useful to an advanced
> sysadmin, or most likely only of real interest to those with more serious
> software engineering resources to devote to it?

It does require a C-developer skill set, but not a particularly specialized
one.  You don't need to be a kernel programmer.  You don't need to know every
nook and cranny of how POSIX filesystems work, though it would help to have
some idea of inodes and file descriptors and the operations that apply to each.
 Experience with asynchronous programming models would be a big plus.  Since
advanced sysadmins often do have development skills as well - some would say
they must by definition - I think they'd be able to learn quite a bit from this
presentation.  Even if it's not enough to write a whole new translator from
scratch, it might be enough to make some useful tweaks or at the very least to
aid in problem determination.
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] FW: Save the Date: Building New File Systems with GlusterFS Translators

[Whit Blauvelt]

What's the technical level required to build translators? What languages are
appropriate? Is this a capability that is likely to be useful to an advanced
sysadmin, or most likely only of real interest to those with more serious
software engineering resources to devote to it?

Whit

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 07:00:25PM +, John Mark Walker wrote:
> FYI... this will be an interesting webinar. If you've wanted to learn how
> GlusterFS translators work, here's your opportunity.
> 
> Session to be led by Jeff Darcy, who has used the translator subsystem
> significantly for building HekaFS (fka CloudFS).
> 
> -JM
> 
> 
> ━━━
> From: Gluster Webinars [heat...@gluster.com]
> Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 11:33 AM
> To: John Mark Walker
> Subject: Save the Date: Building New File Systems with GlusterFS Translators
> 
>  Gluster
>   Register Today for the Gluster for Geeks Webinar Series!
>   GlusterFS is a stackable filesystem with a layered approach that
>   allows developers to easily build new extensions and add new
>   layers to the base filesystem. Join Red Hat engineers Jeff Darcy
>  Webinar: Building New File
>   and Anand Avati as they walk through the GlusterFS architecture 
>Systems with GlusterFS
>   and demonstrate how to get started building new translators.
>  Translators
>   GlusterFS translator contributions in the past have included
>   such things as data encryption, IMAP, FTP, a trash  can, and
>   Wednesday, Oct 26
>   much more. In fact, much of what is considered core 
>  at 9am PT / 12pm ET
>   functionality of GlusterFS is implemented via translators.
>   
>Click here to register!
>   GlusterFS is not just a filesystem, but a framework for new
>   filesystems implemented as translators. Join us for this
>   webinar, and you too can build filesystems on GlusterFS.
>   
>   Topic:   Building New Filesystems with GlusterFS Translators
>   Date: Wednesday, October 26
>   Time: 9 AM PT / 12 PM ET
> 
>   Speakers:
>   Jeff Darcy, Principal SW Engineer, Red Hat
>   Anand Avati, Senior Principal Engineer, Red Hat
>   
>   This will be a 60 minute webinar with the first 30 minutes dedicated to 
> content
>   and the last 30 minutes scheduled for Q&A.  We look forward to seeing 
> you
>   there!
> 
>   Register Now
> 
>   For more information, visit us at www.gluster.com | sa...@gluster.com
>   | 1.800.805.5215
> [1]
> 
> 
> 
> Gluster
> 640 W. California Ave
> Sunnyvale, CA 94086
> 
> Unsubscribe from email communications
> 

> ___
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users@gluster.org
> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

[Gluster-users] FW: Save the Date: Building New File Systems with GlusterFS Translators

[John Mark Walker]

FYI... this will be an interesting webinar. If you've wanted to learn how 
GlusterFS translators work, here's your opportunity.

Session to be led by Jeff Darcy, who has used the translator subsystem 
significantly for building HekaFS (fka CloudFS).

-JM



From: Gluster Webinars [heat...@gluster.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 11:33 AM
To: John Mark Walker
Subject: Save the Date: Building New File Systems with GlusterFS Translators


[Gluster]



Register Today for the Gluster for Geeks Webinar Series!


GlusterFS is a stackable filesystem with a layered approach that allows 
developers to easily build new extensions and add new layers to the base 
filesystem. Join Red Hat engineers Jeff Darcy and Anand Avati as they walk 
through the GlusterFS architecture and demonstrate how to get started building 
new translators. GlusterFS translator contributions in the past have included 
such things as data encryption, IMAP, FTP, a trash  can, and much more. In 
fact, much of what is considered core functionality of GlusterFS is implemented 
via translators.

GlusterFS is not just a filesystem, but a framework for new filesystems 
implemented as translators. Join us for this webinar, and you too can build 
filesystems on GlusterFS.



Webinar: Building New File Systems with GlusterFS Translators

 Wednesday, Oct 26
at 9am PT / 12pm ET


 
Click here to 
register!




Topic:  
 Building New 
Filesystems with GlusterFS 
Translators
Date: Wednesday, October 26
Time: 9 AM PT / 12 PM ET

Speakers:
Jeff Darcy, Principal SW Engineer, Red Hat
Anand Avati, Senior Principal Engineer, Red Hat

This will be a 60 minute webinar with the first 30 minutes dedicated to content 
and the last 30 minutes scheduled for Q&A.  We look forward to seeing you there!

[Register Now]




For more information, visit us at 
www.gluster.com | 
sa...@gluster.com | 1.800.805.5215



[http://www2.gluster.com/r/4822/1/224937089/open/1]


Gluster
640 W. California Ave
Sunnyvale, CA 94086

Unsubscribe
 from email communications
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] What is the default root password for Gluster installed using ISO

[Bala.FA]

Hi Xybrek,

In Gluster Storage Platform, root login is disabled by default.  For
console login, you need to use gluster as user name and glusteradmin
as password.

BTW, Gluster Storage Platform is discontinued. You can try Gluster
Storage Software Appliance along with Gluster Management Console.

Thanks,

Happy hacking,
Bala


On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:46 PM, Xybrek  wrote:
> Hi, I want to know what is the root/admin password for the shell/console of
> Gluster installed using ISO installer (this is version 3.0.5) when password:
> 'glusteradmin' won't work?
>
> If its really 'glusteradmin' then what is the username? Is it root or
> something else?
>
> Cheers.
>
> ___
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users@gluster.org
> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] Optimal XFS formatting?

[Sabuj Pattanayek]

> The issues with both random-access performance and fsck times vary a lot
> according to *exactly* which version of each you're using.  I'm in the same

Yup, our tests recently were done directly to XFS using bonnie,
iozone, fio, and tiobench on centos6, which is not using the most
bleeding edge version of XFS by default. We're still using gluster
3.0.x so many of those benchmarking programs blow up just trying to
start.
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] Relase of 3.3

[John Mark Walker]

Hi Gerald,

As a policy, we never commit to release dates. Know that we are working hard to 
make it available asap.

As for granular locking, there was a patch floating around to be applied to 
3.2.x. Obviously we can't support it, but you're welcome to try it.

Thanks,
JM


Gerald Brandt  wrote:


Hi,

Any news on this?  I'm planning to place VM images on it, and the 3.3 replica 
locking mechanism is way better.

For those using 3.3 RC, how stable is it?

Gerald


- Original Message -
> From: "Gerald Brandt" 
> To: gluster-users@gluster.org
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 3:46:29 PM
> Subject: [Gluster-users] Relase of 3.3
>
> Is there any known date for the release of 3.3?
>
> Gerald
> ___
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users@gluster.org
> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] Relase of 3.3

[Renee Beckloff]

Hi Gerald -( and everyone)

With the recent acquisition by Red Hat, our timelines and our projects are  
being reviewed.  As soon as we have a date, you guys will be the first to know!

Thanks
Renee


Renee M. Beckloff, CISSP
Sr. Manager, Global Support Services
Red Hat (Gluster)
408-598-4324 Office
650-283-4004 Mobile



-Original Message-
From: gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org 
[mailto:gluster-users-boun...@gluster.org] On Behalf Of Gerald Brandt
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 7:59 AM
To: gluster-users@gluster.org
Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Relase of 3.3

Hi,

Any news on this?  I'm planning to place VM images on it, and the 3.3 replica 
locking mechanism is way better.

For those using 3.3 RC, how stable is it?

Gerald


- Original Message -
> From: "Gerald Brandt" 
> To: gluster-users@gluster.org
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 3:46:29 PM
> Subject: [Gluster-users] Relase of 3.3
> 
> Is there any known date for the release of 3.3?
> 
> Gerald
> ___
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users@gluster.org
> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> 
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] Optimal XFS formatting?

[Jeff Darcy]

On 10/20/2011 11:11 AM, Sabuj Pattanayek wrote:
> IIRC XFS also has long fsck times. I don't know of any fs's which
> don't, but I guess you've seen different behavior with respect to ext4
> vs xfs on that issue. One thing I like about XFS is the short mkfs
> time, on the order of a few seconds vs minutes or hours with EXT3/4
> for large fs's.

The issues with both random-access performance and fsck times vary a lot
according to *exactly* which version of each you're using.  I'm in the same
group as many of the developers for both, and those guys are very busy.  Last I
heard, the fsck time and memory requirements were pretty similar between the
two, and any version of XFS with delayed logging should be pretty competitive
with ext4 for random access or metadata-heavy workloads.  I don't even know if
that information is current any more, though.  As always, YMMV and test your
own workload.
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

[Gluster-users] What is the default root password for Gluster installed using ISO

[Xybrek]

Hi, I want to know what is the root/admin password for the shell/console 
of Gluster installed using ISO installer (this is version 3.0.5) when 
password: 'glusteradmin' won't work?


If its really 'glusteradmin' then what is the username? Is it root or 
something else?


Cheers.

___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] Optimal XFS formatting?

[Sabuj Pattanayek]

IIRC XFS also has long fsck times. I don't know of any fs's which
don't, but I guess you've seen different behavior with respect to ext4
vs xfs on that issue. One thing I like about XFS is the short mkfs
time, on the order of a few seconds vs minutes or hours with EXT3/4
for large fs's.

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 9:57 AM, Gerald Brandt  wrote:
> Thanks for the ext4 comments.  My issues with ext4 (and 3) are the long fsck 
> times.  In case of a reboot, w need to be up, and not waiting hours for 6 TB 
> to fsck.
>
> Gerald
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Robert Krig" 
>> To: gluster-users@gluster.org
>> Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 8:53:50 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Optimal XFS formatting?
>>
>>
>> Try using ext4 if you can. Small file read performance will be MUCH
>> better than xfs.
>> On the other hand, you might wanna run some benchmark tests which
>> resemble your workload, to compare xfs vs ext4 both with and without
>> glusterfs.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/20/2011 03:36 PM, Sabuj Pattanayek wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I've seen that EXT4 has better random I/O performance than XFS,
>> > especially on small reads and writes. For large sequential reads
>> > and
>> > writes XFS is a little bit better. For really large sequential
>> > reads
>> > and write EXT4 and XFS are about the same. I used to format XFS
>> > using
>> > this:
>> >
>> > mkfs.xfs -l size=64m
>> >
>> > (notes from
>> > http://everything2.com/title/Filesystem+performance+tweaking+with+XFS+on+Linux)
>> >
>> > but realized that it doesn't seem to effect performance for me. You
>> > should definitely try mounting with this :
>> >
>> > mount -t xfs -o rw,noatime,nodiratime,logbufs=8
>> >
>> > HTH,
>> > Sabuj
>> >
>> > On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Gerald Brandt 
>> > wrote:
>> >> Hi,
>> >>
>> >> Are there any 'optimal' settings for XFS formatting under
>> >> GlusterFS?  The storage will be used for Virtual Disk storage,
>> >> virtual disk size from 8GB to 100 GB in size.
>> >>
>> >> One of the VM's (separate gluster volume) will be running MSSQL
>> >> server (4K reads and writes).  The other will be running file
>> >> servers, etc).
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Gerald
>> >> ___
>> >> Gluster-users mailing list
>> >> Gluster-users@gluster.org
>> >> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>> >>
>> > ___
>> > Gluster-users mailing list
>> > Gluster-users@gluster.org
>> > http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>
>> ___
>> Gluster-users mailing list
>> Gluster-users@gluster.org
>> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>
> ___
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users@gluster.org
> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] Optimal XFS formatting?

[Robert Krig]

Oh wait, I misread your previous post. If I understand correctly, the
actual files that will be read are actually multi-gigabyte VM images.

I wonder how well XFS would perform in such a case, since I guess it
wouldn't directly have to do a ton of directory lookups and such, but
instead seek inside a continous file.


On 10/20/2011 04:57 PM, Gerald Brandt wrote:
> Thanks for the ext4 comments.  My issues with ext4 (and 3) are the long fsck 
> times.  In case of a reboot, w need to be up, and not waiting hours for 6 TB 
> to fsck.
>
> Gerald
>
>
> - Original Message -
>> From: "Robert Krig" 
>> To: gluster-users@gluster.org
>> Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 8:53:50 AM
>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Optimal XFS formatting?
>>
>>
>> Try using ext4 if you can. Small file read performance will be MUCH
>> better than xfs.
>> On the other hand, you might wanna run some benchmark tests which
>> resemble your workload, to compare xfs vs ext4 both with and without
>> glusterfs.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10/20/2011 03:36 PM, Sabuj Pattanayek wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I've seen that EXT4 has better random I/O performance than XFS,
>>> especially on small reads and writes. For large sequential reads
>>> and
>>> writes XFS is a little bit better. For really large sequential
>>> reads
>>> and write EXT4 and XFS are about the same. I used to format XFS
>>> using
>>> this:
>>>
>>> mkfs.xfs -l size=64m
>>>
>>> (notes from
>>> http://everything2.com/title/Filesystem+performance+tweaking+with+XFS+on+Linux)
>>>
>>> but realized that it doesn't seem to effect performance for me. You
>>> should definitely try mounting with this :
>>>
>>> mount -t xfs -o rw,noatime,nodiratime,logbufs=8
>>>
>>> HTH,
>>> Sabuj
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Gerald Brandt 
>>> wrote:
 Hi,

 Are there any 'optimal' settings for XFS formatting under
 GlusterFS?  The storage will be used for Virtual Disk storage,
 virtual disk size from 8GB to 100 GB in size.

 One of the VM's (separate gluster volume) will be running MSSQL
 server (4K reads and writes).  The other will be running file
 servers, etc).

 Thanks,
 Gerald
 ___
 Gluster-users mailing list
 Gluster-users@gluster.org
 http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

>>> ___
>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>> Gluster-users@gluster.org
>>> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>> ___
>> Gluster-users mailing list
>> Gluster-users@gluster.org
>> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>
> ___
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users@gluster.org
> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] Relase of 3.3

[Gerald Brandt]

Hi,

Any news on this?  I'm planning to place VM images on it, and the 3.3 replica 
locking mechanism is way better.

For those using 3.3 RC, how stable is it?

Gerald


- Original Message -
> From: "Gerald Brandt" 
> To: gluster-users@gluster.org
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 3:46:29 PM
> Subject: [Gluster-users] Relase of 3.3
> 
> Is there any known date for the release of 3.3?
> 
> Gerald
> ___
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users@gluster.org
> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> 
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] Optimal XFS formatting?

[Gerald Brandt]

Thanks for the ext4 comments.  My issues with ext4 (and 3) are the long fsck 
times.  In case of a reboot, w need to be up, and not waiting hours for 6 TB to 
fsck.

Gerald


- Original Message -
> From: "Robert Krig" 
> To: gluster-users@gluster.org
> Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 8:53:50 AM
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Optimal XFS formatting?
> 
> 
> Try using ext4 if you can. Small file read performance will be MUCH
> better than xfs.
> On the other hand, you might wanna run some benchmark tests which
> resemble your workload, to compare xfs vs ext4 both with and without
> glusterfs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/20/2011 03:36 PM, Sabuj Pattanayek wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've seen that EXT4 has better random I/O performance than XFS,
> > especially on small reads and writes. For large sequential reads
> > and
> > writes XFS is a little bit better. For really large sequential
> > reads
> > and write EXT4 and XFS are about the same. I used to format XFS
> > using
> > this:
> >
> > mkfs.xfs -l size=64m
> >
> > (notes from
> > http://everything2.com/title/Filesystem+performance+tweaking+with+XFS+on+Linux)
> >
> > but realized that it doesn't seem to effect performance for me. You
> > should definitely try mounting with this :
> >
> > mount -t xfs -o rw,noatime,nodiratime,logbufs=8
> >
> > HTH,
> > Sabuj
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Gerald Brandt 
> > wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Are there any 'optimal' settings for XFS formatting under
> >> GlusterFS?  The storage will be used for Virtual Disk storage,
> >> virtual disk size from 8GB to 100 GB in size.
> >>
> >> One of the VM's (separate gluster volume) will be running MSSQL
> >> server (4K reads and writes).  The other will be running file
> >> servers, etc).
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Gerald
> >> ___
> >> Gluster-users mailing list
> >> Gluster-users@gluster.org
> >> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> >>
> > ___
> > Gluster-users mailing list
> > Gluster-users@gluster.org
> > http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> 
> ___
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users@gluster.org
> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> 
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] Optimal XFS formatting?

[Robert Krig]

Try using ext4 if you can. Small file read performance will be MUCH
better than xfs.
On the other hand, you might wanna run some benchmark tests which
resemble your workload, to compare xfs vs ext4 both with and without
glusterfs.





On 10/20/2011 03:36 PM, Sabuj Pattanayek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've seen that EXT4 has better random I/O performance than XFS,
> especially on small reads and writes. For large sequential reads and
> writes XFS is a little bit better. For really large sequential reads
> and write EXT4 and XFS are about the same. I used to format XFS using
> this:
>
> mkfs.xfs -l size=64m
>
> (notes from 
> http://everything2.com/title/Filesystem+performance+tweaking+with+XFS+on+Linux)
>
> but realized that it doesn't seem to effect performance for me. You
> should definitely try mounting with this :
>
> mount -t xfs -o rw,noatime,nodiratime,logbufs=8
>
> HTH,
> Sabuj
>
> On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Gerald Brandt  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Are there any 'optimal' settings for XFS formatting under GlusterFS?  The 
>> storage will be used for Virtual Disk storage, virtual disk size from 8GB to 
>> 100 GB in size.
>>
>> One of the VM's (separate gluster volume) will be running MSSQL server (4K 
>> reads and writes).  The other will be running file servers, etc).
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Gerald
>> ___
>> Gluster-users mailing list
>> Gluster-users@gluster.org
>> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>
> ___
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users@gluster.org
> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] Optimal XFS formatting?

[Sabuj Pattanayek]

Hi,

I've seen that EXT4 has better random I/O performance than XFS,
especially on small reads and writes. For large sequential reads and
writes XFS is a little bit better. For really large sequential reads
and write EXT4 and XFS are about the same. I used to format XFS using
this:

mkfs.xfs -l size=64m

(notes from 
http://everything2.com/title/Filesystem+performance+tweaking+with+XFS+on+Linux)

but realized that it doesn't seem to effect performance for me. You
should definitely try mounting with this :

mount -t xfs -o rw,noatime,nodiratime,logbufs=8

HTH,
Sabuj

On Thu, Oct 20, 2011 at 8:18 AM, Gerald Brandt  wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Are there any 'optimal' settings for XFS formatting under GlusterFS?  The 
> storage will be used for Virtual Disk storage, virtual disk size from 8GB to 
> 100 GB in size.
>
> One of the VM's (separate gluster volume) will be running MSSQL server (4K 
> reads and writes).  The other will be running file servers, etc).
>
> Thanks,
> Gerald
> ___
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users@gluster.org
> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

[Gluster-users] Optimal XFS formatting?

[Gerald Brandt]

Hi,

Are there any 'optimal' settings for XFS formatting under GlusterFS?  The 
storage will be used for Virtual Disk storage, virtual disk size from 8GB to 
100 GB in size.

One of the VM's (separate gluster volume) will be running MSSQL server (4K 
reads and writes).  The other will be running file servers, etc).

Thanks,
Gerald
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Re: [Gluster-users] Expand replicated bricks to more nodes/change replica count

[Jeff White]

I believe you will have to re-create your volume.

I have a feature request in for this too. 
http://bugs.gluster.com/show_bug.cgi?id=3606


Jeff White
Linux/Unix Systems Engineer
University of Pittsburgh - CSSD
jaw...@pitt.edu


On 10/20/2011 08:41 AM, Daniel Manser wrote:

Hi list

I have set up several volumes on a two-node Gluster setup using
"replica 2" configurations. I would like to add two more nodes to the
trusted pool so that all volumes are replicated on 4 nodes. I wonder
if that can be done online, but after doing some research on this I
didn't find evidence that it's possible to change the replica count
_after_ the volume has been created.

Would I have to stop the volumes, set up a new volume with a replica
of 4, and then start the volume again? Or is there a way to do it
online?

Thanks
Daniel
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

[Gluster-users] Expand replicated bricks to more nodes/change replica count

[Daniel Manser]

Hi list

I have set up several volumes on a two-node Gluster setup using
"replica 2" configurations. I would like to add two more nodes to the
trusted pool so that all volumes are replicated on 4 nodes. I wonder
if that can be done online, but after doing some research on this I
didn't find evidence that it's possible to change the replica count
_after_ the volume has been created.

Would I have to stop the volumes, set up a new volume with a replica
of 4, and then start the volume again? Or is there a way to do it
online?

Thanks
Daniel
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

[Gluster-users] Unable to delete, stop volume

[Neetu Ojha]

Dear Team,

 I have installed
 glusterfs:3.2
 OS: RHEL(64 bits)
 Volume type : replicated
 NO of nodes:2
 mode:RDMA

I  wanted to delete the existing replicated volume and create volume of type
stripe. But I am not able to stop , delete and remove brick  even after
restarting glusterd daemons.


gluster peer status
Number of Peers: 2

Hostname: 172.20.x.xx
Uuid: 4e8903c0-676f-415b-abc9-0076aded322d
State: Peer in Cluster (Connected)

Hostname: 172.20.x.xx
Uuid: 68371d39-07c0-4598-8f69-a960fdfe580f
State: Peer in Cluster (Connected)


gluster volume stop test-volume force
Stopping volume will make its data inaccessible. Do you want to continue?
(y/n) y
operation failed

gluster volume remove-brick test-volume-infi 10.20.1.82:
/pvfs2store/glusterfs-disk2
Removing brick(s) can result in data loss. Do you want to Continue? (y/n) y
Operation failed

LOgs are as:

tail /var/log/glusterfs/etc-glusterfs-glusterd.vol.log

[2011-10-20 15:01:34.918692] E
[glusterd-handler.c:1137:glusterd_handle_cli_stop_volume] 0-: Unable to set
cli op: 16
[2011-10-20 15:01:34.919646] W [socket.c:1494:__socket_proto_state_machine]
0-socket.management: reading from socket failed. Error (Transport endpoint
is not connected), peer (127.0.0.1:1021)
[2011-10-20 15:02:08.141342] E
[glusterd-handler.c:2003:glusterd_handle_remove_brick] 0-: Unable to set cli
op: 16
[2011-10-20 15:02:08.141369] E
[glusterd-handler.c:2157:glusterd_handle_remove_brick] 0-: Operation failed
[2011-10-20 15:02:08.142280] W [socket.c:1494:__socket_proto_state_machine]
0-socket.management: reading from socket failed. Error (Transport endpoint
is not connected), peer (127.0.0.1:1018)



 tail /var/log/glusterfs/cli.log

[2011-10-20 15:01:32.318887] W [rpc-transport.c:605:rpc_transport_load]
0-rpc-transport: missing 'option transport-type'. defaulting to "socket"
[2011-10-20 15:01:32.323045] I
[cli-cmd-volume.c:1077:cli_check_gsync_present] 0-: geo-replication not
installed
[2011-10-20 15:01:34.918803] I [cli-rpc-ops.c:765:gf_cli3_1_stop_volume_cbk]
0-cli: Received resp to stop volume
[2011-10-20 15:01:34.918851] I [input.c:46:cli_batch] 0-: Exiting with: 16
[2011-10-20 15:02:04.478852] W [rpc-transport.c:605:rpc_transport_load]
0-rpc-transport: missing 'option transport-type'. defaulting to "socket"
[2011-10-20 15:02:04.482979] I
[cli-cmd-volume.c:1077:cli_check_gsync_present] 0-: geo-replication not
installed
[2011-10-20 15:02:08.141433] I
[cli-rpc-ops.c:1046:gf_cli3_1_remove_brick_cbk] 0-cli: Received resp to
remove brick
[2011-10-20 15:02:08.141484] I [input.c:46:cli_batch] 0-: Exiting with: -1


Kindly help to fix the issue as I have to create volume of stripe type by
removing the existing volume of replicated type.


Thanks In advance.
REgards
Neetu Sharma
___
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users