Alessandro De Salvo
2015-Jun-24 14:11 UTC
[Gluster-users] Brick logs filling with messages on gluster 3.7.2
Hi, I just upgraded to gluster 3.7.2 from 3.7.1, and now the brick logs of my replicated volumes are filling very quickly with messages like this: [2015-06-24 14:08:13.989147] I [dict.c:467:dict_get] (--> /lib64/libglusterfs.so.0(_gf_log_callingfn+0x186)[0x7f02d7cf7ef6] (--> /lib64/libglusterfs.so.0(dict_get+0x90)[0x7f02d7cf0ce0] (--> /usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.7.2/xlator/storage/posix.so(posix_setxattr +0x1b9)[0x7f02ca48a439] (--> /lib64/libglusterfs.so.0(default_setxattr +0x75)[0x7f02d7cfc3a5] (--> /usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.7.2/xlator/features/changetimerecorder.so(ctr_setxattr+0x186)[0x7f02c9a42696] ))))) 0-dict: !this || key=dht-get-iatt-in-xattr Seems they are just info messages, but they are indeed creating huge logs, which is a problem for the machines. So, two questions: 1) should we really take care of such messages or are they harmless? 2) if they are harmless, how can we suppress them? Thanks, Alessandro
Raghavendra Talur
2015-Jun-24 20:53 UTC
[Gluster-users] Brick logs filling with messages on gluster 3.7.2
On 06/24/2015 07:41 PM, Alessandro De Salvo wrote:> Hi, > I just upgraded to gluster 3.7.2 from 3.7.1, and now the brick logs of > my replicated volumes are filling very quickly with messages like this: > > [2015-06-24 14:08:13.989147] I [dict.c:467:dict_get] > (--> /lib64/libglusterfs.so.0(_gf_log_callingfn+0x186)[0x7f02d7cf7ef6] > (--> /lib64/libglusterfs.so.0(dict_get+0x90)[0x7f02d7cf0ce0] > (--> /usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.7.2/xlator/storage/posix.so(posix_setxattr > +0x1b9)[0x7f02ca48a439] (--> /lib64/libglusterfs.so.0(default_setxattr > +0x75)[0x7f02d7cfc3a5] > (--> /usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.7.2/xlator/features/changetimerecorder.so(ctr_setxattr+0x186)[0x7f02c9a42696] ))))) 0-dict: !this || key=dht-get-iatt-in-xattr > > > Seems they are just info messages, but they are indeed creating huge > logs, which is a problem for the machines. > So, two questions: > > 1) should we really take care of such messages or are they harmless?This seem to be harmless.> 2) if they are harmless, how can we suppress them?Unfortunately, I don't see a way to fix this without code change. I have sent a patch at http://review.gluster.org/#/c/11390/ Review request : Nithya, Raghavendra, Susant. Thanks, Raghavendra Talur> > Thanks, > > Alessandro > > _______________________________________________ > Gluster-users mailing list > Gluster-users at gluster.org > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >