Is it possible a gluster volume rebalance (or remove brick) was in progress
in the background? If so you might have hit
http://review.gluster.org/3861. If not, can you please file a bug with the
client logs (of all the machines where 'disk' file was possibly getting
modified?
Thanks,
Avati
On Fri
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 09:21:57 +0100
Brian Candler wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 10:01:16AM +0200, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
> > Again, let me note two things:
> > - the current code has a lot more (other) problems than the 2.X tree, that
> > is
> > why we won't use that.
> > - if one has
On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 10:01:16AM +0200, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
> Again, let me note two things:
> - the current code has a lot more (other) problems than the 2.X tree, that is
> why we won't use that.
> - if one has to look at the code to find out the basic problem he is not the
> target
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 18:43:27 +0100
Brian Candler wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 03:08:21PM +0200, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
> > The gluster version is 2.X and cannot be changed.
>
> Ah, that's the important bit. If you have a way to replicate the problem
> with current code it will be eas
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 03:08:21PM +0200, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
> The gluster version is 2.X and cannot be changed.
Ah, that's the important bit. If you have a way to replicate the problem
with current code it will be easier to get someone to look at it.
> AFAIK the glusterfsd
> versions
On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 20:01:20 +0100
Brian Candler wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 03:50:16PM +0200, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
> > I'd like to point you to "[Gluster-devel] Specific bug question" dated few
> > days ago, where I describe a trivial situation when owner changes on a brick
> > ca
On 08/26/2012 12:01 PM, Brian Candler wrote:
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 03:50:16PM +0200, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
I'd like to point you to "[Gluster-devel] Specific bug question" dated few
days ago, where I describe a trivial situation when owner changes on a brick
can occur, asking if someo
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 03:50:16PM +0200, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
> I'd like to point you to "[Gluster-devel] Specific bug question" dated few
> days ago, where I describe a trivial situation when owner changes on a brick
> can occur, asking if someone can point me to a patch for that.
I gu
Hi Brian,
> This sounds extremely unlikely. mdadm and LVM both work at the block device
> layer - reading and writing 512-byte blocks. They have no understanding of
> filesystems and no understanding of user IDs.
>
Agreed.
> I suspect there were other differences between the tests. For example
On Sun, 26 Aug 2012 08:53:33 +0100
Brian Candler wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 07:45:35PM -0600, Joe Topjian wrote:
> >This removed mdadm and LVM out of the equation and the problem went
> >away. I then tried with just LVM and still did not see this problem.
> >
> >Unfortunately I
On Fri, Aug 24, 2012 at 07:45:35PM -0600, Joe Topjian wrote:
>This removed mdadm and LVM out of the equation and the problem went
>away. I then tried with just LVM and still did not see this problem.
>
>Unfortunately I don't have enough hardware at the moment to create
>another RAI
I figured out how to work around this but I'm not sure of the exact reason
why it happened.
The Gluster bricks I was using were LVM LV partitions that sat on top of a
software RAID1. I broke the software RAID and dedicated one hard drive to
LVM in order for OpenStack to use it for nova-volumes. I
Hello,
I'm seeing a weird issue with OpenStack and Gluster.
I have /var/lib/nova/instances mounted as a glusterfs volume. The owner of
/var/lib/nova/instances is nova:nova.
When I launch a vm and watch it launching, I see the following:
root@c01:/var/lib/nova/instances/instance-0012# ls -l
13 matches
Mail list logo
