Hu Bert
2019-Mar-18 12:41 UTC
[Gluster-users] Upgrade 5.3 -> 5.4 on debian: public IP is used instead of LAN IP
Hi Amar, if you refer to this bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1674225 : in the test setup i haven't seen those entries, while copying & deleting a few GBs of data. For a final statement we have to wait until i updated our live gluster servers - could take place on tuesday or wednesday. Maybe other users can do an update to 5.4 as well and report back here. Hubert Am Mo., 18. M?rz 2019 um 11:36 Uhr schrieb Amar Tumballi Suryanarayan <atumball at redhat.com>:> > Hi Hu Bert, > > Appreciate the feedback. Also are the other boiling issues related to logs fixed now? > > -Amar > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 3:54 PM Hu Bert <revirii at googlemail.com> wrote: >> >> update: upgrade from 5.3 -> 5.5 in a replicate 3 test setup with 2 >> volumes done. In 'gluster peer status' the peers stay connected during >> the upgrade, no 'peer rejected' messages. No cksum mismatches in the >> logs. Looks good :-) >> >> Am Mo., 18. M?rz 2019 um 09:54 Uhr schrieb Hu Bert <revirii at googlemail.com>: >> > >> > Good morning :-) >> > >> > for debian the packages are there: >> > https://download.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/5/5.5/Debian/stretch/amd64/apt/pool/main/g/glusterfs/ >> > >> > I'll do an upgrade of a test installation 5.3 -> 5.5 and see if there >> > are some errors etc. and report back. >> > >> > btw: no release notes for 5.4 and 5.5 so far? >> > https://docs.gluster.org/en/latest/release-notes/ ? >> > >> > Am Fr., 15. M?rz 2019 um 14:28 Uhr schrieb Shyam Ranganathan >> > <srangana at redhat.com>: >> > > >> > > We created a 5.5 release tag, and it is under packaging now. It should >> > > be packaged and ready for testing early next week and should be released >> > > close to mid-week next week. >> > > >> > > Thanks, >> > > Shyam >> > > On 3/13/19 12:34 PM, Artem Russakovskii wrote: >> > > > Wednesday now with no update :-/ >> > > > >> > > > Sincerely, >> > > > Artem >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror >> > > > <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | +ArtemRussakovskii >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR >> > > > <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 10:28 AM Artem Russakovskii <archon810 at gmail.com >> > > > <mailto:archon810 at gmail.com>> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Hi Amar, >> > > > >> > > > Any updates on this? I'm still not seeing it in OpenSUSE build >> > > > repos. Maybe later today? >> > > > >> > > > Thanks. >> > > > >> > > > Sincerely, >> > > > Artem >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror >> > > > <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | +ArtemRussakovskii >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR >> > > > <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 10:30 PM Amar Tumballi Suryanarayan >> > > > <atumball at redhat.com <mailto:atumball at redhat.com>> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > We are talking days. Not weeks. Considering already it is >> > > > Thursday here. 1 more day for tagging, and packaging. May be ok >> > > > to expect it on Monday. >> > > > >> > > > -Amar >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 11:54 AM Artem Russakovskii >> > > > <archon810 at gmail.com <mailto:archon810 at gmail.com>> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Is the next release going to be an imminent hotfix, i.e. >> > > > something like today/tomorrow, or are we talking weeks? >> > > > >> > > > Sincerely, >> > > > Artem >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK >> > > > Mirror <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | +ArtemRussakovskii >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR >> > > > <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 11:09 AM Artem Russakovskii >> > > > <archon810 at gmail.com <mailto:archon810 at gmail.com>> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Ended up downgrading to 5.3 just in case. Peer status >> > > > and volume status are OK now. >> > > > >> > > > zypper install --oldpackage glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1 >> > > > Loading repository data... >> > > > Reading installed packages... >> > > > Resolving package dependencies... >> > > > >> > > > Problem: glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 requires >> > > > libgfapi0 = 5.3, but this requirement cannot be provided >> > > > not installable providers: >> > > > libgfapi0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64[glusterfs] >> > > > Solution 1: Following actions will be done: >> > > > downgrade of libgfapi0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to >> > > > libgfapi0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 >> > > > downgrade of libgfchangelog0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to >> > > > libgfchangelog0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 >> > > > downgrade of libgfrpc0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to >> > > > libgfrpc0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 >> > > > downgrade of libgfxdr0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to >> > > > libgfxdr0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 >> > > > downgrade of libglusterfs0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to >> > > > libglusterfs0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 >> > > > Solution 2: do not install glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 >> > > > Solution 3: break glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 by >> > > > ignoring some of its dependencies >> > > > >> > > > Choose from above solutions by number or cancel >> > > > [1/2/3/c] (c): 1 >> > > > Resolving dependencies... >> > > > Resolving package dependencies... >> > > > >> > > > The following 6 packages are going to be downgraded: >> > > > glusterfs libgfapi0 libgfchangelog0 libgfrpc0 >> > > > libgfxdr0 libglusterfs0 >> > > > >> > > > 6 packages to downgrade. >> > > > >> > > > Sincerely, >> > > > Artem >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Founder, Android Police >> > > > <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror >> > > > <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | +ArtemRussakovskii >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR >> > > > <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 10:57 AM Artem Russakovskii >> > > > <archon810 at gmail.com <mailto:archon810 at gmail.com>> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > Noticed the same when upgrading from 5.3 to 5.4, as >> > > > mentioned. >> > > > >> > > > I'm confused though. Is actual replication affected, >> > > > because the 5.4 server and the 3x 5.3 servers still >> > > > show heal info as all 4 connected, and the files >> > > > seem to be replicating correctly as well. >> > > > >> > > > So what's actually affected - just the status >> > > > command, or leaving 5.4 on one of the nodes is doing >> > > > some damage to the underlying fs? Is it fixable by >> > > > tweaking transport.socket.ssl-enabled? Does >> > > > upgrading all servers to 5.4 resolve it, or should >> > > > we revert back to 5.3? >> > > > >> > > > Sincerely, >> > > > Artem >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Founder, Android Police >> > > > <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror >> > > > <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | >> > > > +ArtemRussakovskii >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> >> > > > | @ArtemR <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 2:02 AM Hu Bert >> > > > <revirii at googlemail.com >> > > > <mailto:revirii at googlemail.com>> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > fyi: did a downgrade 5.4 -> 5.3 and it worked. >> > > > all replicas are up and >> > > > running. Awaiting updated v5.4. >> > > > >> > > > thx :-) >> > > > >> > > > Am Di., 5. M?rz 2019 um 09:26 Uhr schrieb Hari >> > > > Gowtham <hgowtham at redhat.com >> > > > <mailto:hgowtham at redhat.com>>: >> > > > > >> > > > > There are plans to revert the patch causing >> > > > this error and rebuilt 5.4. >> > > > > This should happen faster. the rebuilt 5.4 >> > > > should be void of this upgrade issue. >> > > > > >> > > > > In the meantime, you can use 5.3 for this cluster. >> > > > > Downgrading to 5.3 will work if it was just >> > > > one node that was upgrade to 5.4 >> > > > > and the other nodes are still in 5.3. >> > > > > >> > > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 1:07 PM Hu Bert >> > > > <revirii at googlemail.com >> > > > <mailto:revirii at googlemail.com>> wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Hi Hari, >> > > > > > >> > > > > > thx for the hint. Do you know when this will >> > > > be fixed? Is a downgrade >> > > > > > 5.4 -> 5.3 a possibility to fix this? >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Hubert >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Am Di., 5. M?rz 2019 um 08:32 Uhr schrieb >> > > > Hari Gowtham <hgowtham at redhat.com >> > > > <mailto:hgowtham at redhat.com>>: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hi, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > This is a known issue we are working on. >> > > > > > > As the checksum differs between the >> > > > updated and non updated node, the >> > > > > > > peers are getting rejected. >> > > > > > > The bricks aren't coming because of the >> > > > same issue. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > More about the issue: >> > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685120 >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 12:56 PM Hu Bert >> > > > <revirii at googlemail.com >> > > > <mailto:revirii at googlemail.com>> wrote: >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Interestingly: gluster volume status >> > > > misses gluster1, while heal >> > > > > > > > statistics show gluster1: >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > gluster volume status workdata >> > > > > > > > Status of volume: workdata >> > > > > > > > Gluster process >> > > > TCP Port RDMA Port Online Pid >> > > > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > > > > Brick gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata >> > > > 49153 0 Y 1723 >> > > > > > > > Brick gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata >> > > > 49153 0 Y 2068 >> > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost >> > > > N/A N/A Y 1732 >> > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on gluster3 >> > > > N/A N/A Y 2077 >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > vs. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > gluster volume heal workdata statistics >> > > > heal-count >> > > > > > > > Gathering count of entries to be healed >> > > > on volume workdata has been successful >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Brick gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata >> > > > > > > > Number of entries: 0 >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Brick gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata >> > > > > > > > Number of entries: 10745 >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Brick gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata >> > > > > > > > Number of entries: 10744 >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Am Di., 5. M?rz 2019 um 08:18 Uhr >> > > > schrieb Hu Bert <revirii at googlemail.com >> > > > <mailto:revirii at googlemail.com>>: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hi Miling, >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > well, there are such entries, but >> > > > those haven't been a problem during >> > > > > > > > > install and the last kernel >> > > > update+reboot. The entries look like: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > PUBLIC_IP gluster2.alpserver.de >> > > > <http://gluster2.alpserver.de> gluster2 >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.50 gluster1 >> > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.51 gluster2 >> > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.52 gluster3 >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > 'ping gluster2' resolves to LAN IP; I >> > > > removed the last entry in the >> > > > > > > > > 1st line, did a reboot ... no, didn't >> > > > help. From >> > > > > > > > > /var/log/glusterfs/glusterd.log >> > > > > > > > > on gluster 2: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > [2019-03-05 07:04:36.188128] E [MSGID: >> > > > 106010] >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > [glusterd-utils.c:3483:glusterd_compare_friend_volume] >> > > > 0-management: >> > > > > > > > > Version of Cksums persistent differ. >> > > > local cksum = 3950307018, remote >> > > > > > > > > cksum = 455409345 on peer gluster1 >> > > > > > > > > [2019-03-05 07:04:36.188314] I [MSGID: >> > > > 106493] >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > [glusterd-handler.c:3843:glusterd_xfer_friend_add_resp] >> > > > 0-glusterd: >> > > > > > > > > Responded to gluster1 (0), ret: 0, >> > > > op_ret: -1 >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Interestingly there are no entries in >> > > > the brick logs of the rejected >> > > > > > > > > server. Well, not surprising as no >> > > > brick process is running. The >> > > > > > > > > server gluster1 is still in rejected >> > > > state. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > 'gluster volume start workdata force' >> > > > starts the brick process on >> > > > > > > > > gluster1, and some heals are happening >> > > > on gluster2+3, but via 'gluster >> > > > > > > > > volume status workdata' the volumes >> > > > still aren't complete. >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > gluster1: >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > > > > > Brick gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata >> > > > 49152 0 Y 2523 >> > > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost >> > > > N/A N/A Y 2549 >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > gluster2: >> > > > > > > > > Gluster process >> > > > TCP Port RDMA Port Online Pid >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > > > > > Brick gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata >> > > > 49153 0 Y 1723 >> > > > > > > > > Brick gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata >> > > > 49153 0 Y 2068 >> > > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost >> > > > N/A N/A Y 1732 >> > > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on gluster3 >> > > > N/A N/A Y 2077 >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hubert >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Am Di., 5. M?rz 2019 um 07:58 Uhr >> > > > schrieb Milind Changire <mchangir at redhat.com >> > > > <mailto:mchangir at redhat.com>>: >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > There are probably DNS entries or >> > > > /etc/hosts entries with the public IP Addresses >> > > > that the host names (gluster1, gluster2, >> > > > gluster3) are getting resolved to. >> > > > > > > > > > /etc/resolv.conf would tell which is >> > > > the default domain searched for the node names >> > > > and the DNS servers which respond to the queries. >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 12:14 PM Hu >> > > > Bert <revirii at googlemail.com >> > > > <mailto:revirii at googlemail.com>> wrote: >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Good morning, >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> i have a replicate 3 setup with 2 >> > > > volumes, running on version 5.3 on >> > > > > > > > > >> debian stretch. This morning i >> > > > upgraded one server to version 5.4 and >> > > > > > > > > >> rebooted the machine; after the >> > > > restart i noticed that: >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> - no brick process is running >> > > > > > > > > >> - gluster volume status only shows >> > > > the server itself: >> > > > > > > > > >> gluster volume status workdata >> > > > > > > > > >> Status of volume: workdata >> > > > > > > > > >> Gluster process >> > > > TCP Port RDMA Port Online Pid >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > > > > > > > > >> Brick >> > > > gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata N/A >> > > > N/A N N/A >> > > > > > > > > >> NFS Server on localhost >> > > > N/A N/A N N/A >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> - gluster peer status on the server >> > > > > > > > > >> gluster peer status >> > > > > > > > > >> Number of Peers: 2 >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster3 >> > > > > > > > > >> Uuid: >> > > > c7b4a448-ca6a-4051-877f-788f9ee9bc4a >> > > > > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected (Connected) >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster2 >> > > > > > > > > >> Uuid: >> > > > 162fea82-406a-4f51-81a3-e90235d8da27 >> > > > > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected (Connected) >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> - gluster peer status on the other >> > > > 2 servers: >> > > > > > > > > >> gluster peer status >> > > > > > > > > >> Number of Peers: 2 >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster1 >> > > > > > > > > >> Uuid: >> > > > 9a360776-7b58-49ae-831e-a0ce4e4afbef >> > > > > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected (Connected) >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster3 >> > > > > > > > > >> Uuid: >> > > > c7b4a448-ca6a-4051-877f-788f9ee9bc4a >> > > > > > > > > >> State: Peer in Cluster (Connected) >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> I noticed that, in the brick logs, >> > > > i see that the public IP is used >> > > > > > > > > >> instead of the LAN IP. brick logs >> > > > from one of the volumes: >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> rejected node: >> > > > https://pastebin.com/qkpj10Sd >> > > > > > > > > >> connected nodes: >> > > > https://pastebin.com/8SxVVYFV >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Why is the public IP suddenly used >> > > > instead of the LAN IP? Killing all >> > > > > > > > > >> gluster processes and rebooting >> > > > (again) didn't help. >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> Thx, >> > > > > > > > > >> Hubert >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > > > > > > >> Gluster-users mailing list >> > > > > > > > > >> Gluster-users at gluster.org >> > > > <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > > > > Milind >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > > > > > Gluster-users mailing list >> > > > > > > > Gluster-users at gluster.org >> > > > <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org> >> > > > > > > > >> > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- >> > > > > > > Regards, >> > > > > > > Hari Gowtham. >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > -- >> > > > > Regards, >> > > > > Hari Gowtham. >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > Gluster-users mailing list >> > > > Gluster-users at gluster.org >> > > > <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org> >> > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >> > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > Gluster-users mailing list >> > > > Gluster-users at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org> >> > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > -- >> > > > Amar Tumballi (amarts) >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > Gluster-users mailing list >> > > > Gluster-users at gluster.org >> > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >> > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Gluster-users mailing list >> > > Gluster-users at gluster.org >> > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > > > > -- > Amar Tumballi (amarts)
Artem Russakovskii
2019-Mar-19 14:53 UTC
[Gluster-users] Upgrade 5.3 -> 5.4 on debian: public IP is used instead of LAN IP
The flood is indeed fixed for us on 5.5. However, the crashes are not. Sincerely, Artem -- Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC beerpla.net | +ArtemRussakovskii <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 5:41 AM Hu Bert <revirii at googlemail.com> wrote:> Hi Amar, > > if you refer to this bug: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1674225 : in the test > setup i haven't seen those entries, while copying & deleting a few GBs > of data. For a final statement we have to wait until i updated our > live gluster servers - could take place on tuesday or wednesday. > > Maybe other users can do an update to 5.4 as well and report back here. > > > Hubert > > > > Am Mo., 18. M?rz 2019 um 11:36 Uhr schrieb Amar Tumballi Suryanarayan > <atumball at redhat.com>: > > > > Hi Hu Bert, > > > > Appreciate the feedback. Also are the other boiling issues related to > logs fixed now? > > > > -Amar > > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2019 at 3:54 PM Hu Bert <revirii at googlemail.com> wrote: > >> > >> update: upgrade from 5.3 -> 5.5 in a replicate 3 test setup with 2 > >> volumes done. In 'gluster peer status' the peers stay connected during > >> the upgrade, no 'peer rejected' messages. No cksum mismatches in the > >> logs. Looks good :-) > >> > >> Am Mo., 18. M?rz 2019 um 09:54 Uhr schrieb Hu Bert < > revirii at googlemail.com>: > >> > > >> > Good morning :-) > >> > > >> > for debian the packages are there: > >> > > https://download.gluster.org/pub/gluster/glusterfs/5/5.5/Debian/stretch/amd64/apt/pool/main/g/glusterfs/ > >> > > >> > I'll do an upgrade of a test installation 5.3 -> 5.5 and see if there > >> > are some errors etc. and report back. > >> > > >> > btw: no release notes for 5.4 and 5.5 so far? > >> > https://docs.gluster.org/en/latest/release-notes/ ? > >> > > >> > Am Fr., 15. M?rz 2019 um 14:28 Uhr schrieb Shyam Ranganathan > >> > <srangana at redhat.com>: > >> > > > >> > > We created a 5.5 release tag, and it is under packaging now. It > should > >> > > be packaged and ready for testing early next week and should be > released > >> > > close to mid-week next week. > >> > > > >> > > Thanks, > >> > > Shyam > >> > > On 3/13/19 12:34 PM, Artem Russakovskii wrote: > >> > > > Wednesday now with no update :-/ > >> > > > > >> > > > Sincerely, > >> > > > Artem > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK > Mirror > >> > > > <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC > >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | +ArtemRussakovskii > >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR > >> > > > <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Tue, Mar 12, 2019 at 10:28 AM Artem Russakovskii < > archon810 at gmail.com > >> > > > <mailto:archon810 at gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > Hi Amar, > >> > > > > >> > > > Any updates on this? I'm still not seeing it in OpenSUSE build > >> > > > repos. Maybe later today? > >> > > > > >> > > > Thanks. > >> > > > > >> > > > Sincerely, > >> > > > Artem > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK > Mirror > >> > > > <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC > >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | +ArtemRussakovskii > >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR > >> > > > <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2019 at 10:30 PM Amar Tumballi Suryanarayan > >> > > > <atumball at redhat.com <mailto:atumball at redhat.com>> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > We are talking days. Not weeks. Considering already it is > >> > > > Thursday here. 1 more day for tagging, and packaging. May > be ok > >> > > > to expect it on Monday. > >> > > > > >> > > > -Amar > >> > > > > >> > > > On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 11:54 AM Artem Russakovskii > >> > > > <archon810 at gmail.com <mailto:archon810 at gmail.com>> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > Is the next release going to be an imminent hotfix, > i.e. > >> > > > something like today/tomorrow, or are we talking > weeks? > >> > > > > >> > > > Sincerely, > >> > > > Artem > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, > APK > >> > > > Mirror <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot > LLC > >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | > +ArtemRussakovskii > >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | > @ArtemR > >> > > > <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 11:09 AM Artem Russakovskii > >> > > > <archon810 at gmail.com <mailto:archon810 at gmail.com>> > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > Ended up downgrading to 5.3 just in case. Peer > status > >> > > > and volume status are OK now. > >> > > > > >> > > > zypper install --oldpackage > glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1 > >> > > > Loading repository data... > >> > > > Reading installed packages... > >> > > > Resolving package dependencies... > >> > > > > >> > > > Problem: glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 requires > >> > > > libgfapi0 = 5.3, but this requirement cannot be > provided > >> > > > not installable providers: > >> > > > libgfapi0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64[glusterfs] > >> > > > Solution 1: Following actions will be done: > >> > > > downgrade of libgfapi0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to > >> > > > libgfapi0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 > >> > > > downgrade of > libgfchangelog0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to > >> > > > libgfchangelog0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 > >> > > > downgrade of libgfrpc0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to > >> > > > libgfrpc0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 > >> > > > downgrade of libgfxdr0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to > >> > > > libgfxdr0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 > >> > > > downgrade of > libglusterfs0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to > >> > > > libglusterfs0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 > >> > > > Solution 2: do not install > glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 > >> > > > Solution 3: break > glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 by > >> > > > ignoring some of its dependencies > >> > > > > >> > > > Choose from above solutions by number or cancel > >> > > > [1/2/3/c] (c): 1 > >> > > > Resolving dependencies... > >> > > > Resolving package dependencies... > >> > > > > >> > > > The following 6 packages are going to be > downgraded: > >> > > > glusterfs libgfapi0 libgfchangelog0 libgfrpc0 > >> > > > libgfxdr0 libglusterfs0 > >> > > > > >> > > > 6 packages to downgrade. > >> > > > > >> > > > Sincerely, > >> > > > Artem > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > Founder, Android Police > >> > > > <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror > >> > > > <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC > >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | > +ArtemRussakovskii > >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | > @ArtemR > >> > > > <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 10:57 AM Artem Russakovskii > >> > > > <archon810 at gmail.com <mailto:archon810 at gmail.com>> > wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > Noticed the same when upgrading from 5.3 to > 5.4, as > >> > > > mentioned. > >> > > > > >> > > > I'm confused though. Is actual replication > affected, > >> > > > because the 5.4 server and the 3x 5.3 servers > still > >> > > > show heal info as all 4 connected, and the > files > >> > > > seem to be replicating correctly as well. > >> > > > > >> > > > So what's actually affected - just the status > >> > > > command, or leaving 5.4 on one of the nodes > is doing > >> > > > some damage to the underlying fs? Is it > fixable by > >> > > > tweaking transport.socket.ssl-enabled? Does > >> > > > upgrading all servers to 5.4 resolve it, or > should > >> > > > we revert back to 5.3? > >> > > > > >> > > > Sincerely, > >> > > > Artem > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > Founder, Android Police > >> > > > <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror > >> > > > <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot > LLC > >> > > > beerpla.net <http://beerpla.net/> | > >> > > > +ArtemRussakovskii > >> > > > <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> > >> > > > | @ArtemR <http://twitter.com/ArtemR> > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 2:02 AM Hu Bert > >> > > > <revirii at googlemail.com > >> > > > <mailto:revirii at googlemail.com>> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > fyi: did a downgrade 5.4 -> 5.3 and it > worked. > >> > > > all replicas are up and > >> > > > running. Awaiting updated v5.4. > >> > > > > >> > > > thx :-) > >> > > > > >> > > > Am Di., 5. M?rz 2019 um 09:26 Uhr schrieb > Hari > >> > > > Gowtham <hgowtham at redhat.com > >> > > > <mailto:hgowtham at redhat.com>>: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > There are plans to revert the patch > causing > >> > > > this error and rebuilt 5.4. > >> > > > > This should happen faster. the rebuilt > 5.4 > >> > > > should be void of this upgrade issue. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > In the meantime, you can use 5.3 for > this cluster. > >> > > > > Downgrading to 5.3 will work if it was > just > >> > > > one node that was upgrade to 5.4 > >> > > > > and the other nodes are still in 5.3. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 1:07 PM Hu Bert > >> > > > <revirii at googlemail.com > >> > > > <mailto:revirii at googlemail.com>> wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Hi Hari, > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > thx for the hint. Do you know when > this will > >> > > > be fixed? Is a downgrade > >> > > > > > 5.4 -> 5.3 a possibility to fix this? > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Hubert > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > Am Di., 5. M?rz 2019 um 08:32 Uhr > schrieb > >> > > > Hari Gowtham <hgowtham at redhat.com > >> > > > <mailto:hgowtham at redhat.com>>: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hi, > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > This is a known issue we are > working on. > >> > > > > > > As the checksum differs between the > >> > > > updated and non updated node, the > >> > > > > > > peers are getting rejected. > >> > > > > > > The bricks aren't coming because of > the > >> > > > same issue. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > More about the issue: > >> > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685120 > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 12:56 PM Hu > Bert > >> > > > <revirii at googlemail.com > >> > > > <mailto:revirii at googlemail.com>> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Interestingly: gluster volume > status > >> > > > misses gluster1, while heal > >> > > > > > > > statistics show gluster1: > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > gluster volume status workdata > >> > > > > > > > Status of volume: workdata > >> > > > > > > > Gluster process > >> > > > TCP Port RDMA Port Online Pid > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > > > > > > > Brick > gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> > > > 49153 0 Y 1723 > >> > > > > > > > Brick > gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> > > > 49153 0 Y 2068 > >> > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost > >> > > > N/A N/A Y 1732 > >> > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on gluster3 > >> > > > N/A N/A Y 2077 > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > vs. > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > gluster volume heal workdata > statistics > >> > > > heal-count > >> > > > > > > > Gathering count of entries to be > healed > >> > > > on volume workdata has been successful > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Brick > gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> > > > > > > > Number of entries: 0 > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Brick > gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> > > > > > > > Number of entries: 10745 > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Brick > gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> > > > > > > > Number of entries: 10744 > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Am Di., 5. M?rz 2019 um 08:18 Uhr > >> > > > schrieb Hu Bert <revirii at googlemail.com > >> > > > <mailto:revirii at googlemail.com>>: > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hi Miling, > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > well, there are such entries, > but > >> > > > those haven't been a problem during > >> > > > > > > > > install and the last kernel > >> > > > update+reboot. The entries look like: > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > PUBLIC_IP > gluster2.alpserver.de > >> > > > <http://gluster2.alpserver.de> gluster2 > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.50 gluster1 > >> > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.51 gluster2 > >> > > > > > > > > 192.168.0.52 gluster3 > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > 'ping gluster2' resolves to LAN > IP; I > >> > > > removed the last entry in the > >> > > > > > > > > 1st line, did a reboot ... no, > didn't > >> > > > help. From > >> > > > > > > > > /var/log/glusterfs/glusterd.log > >> > > > > > > > > on gluster 2: > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > [2019-03-05 07:04:36.188128] E > [MSGID: > >> > > > 106010] > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > [glusterd-utils.c:3483:glusterd_compare_friend_volume] > >> > > > 0-management: > >> > > > > > > > > Version of Cksums persistent > differ. > >> > > > local cksum = 3950307018, remote > >> > > > > > > > > cksum = 455409345 on peer > gluster1 > >> > > > > > > > > [2019-03-05 07:04:36.188314] I > [MSGID: > >> > > > 106493] > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > [glusterd-handler.c:3843:glusterd_xfer_friend_add_resp] > >> > > > 0-glusterd: > >> > > > > > > > > Responded to gluster1 (0), ret: > 0, > >> > > > op_ret: -1 > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Interestingly there are no > entries in > >> > > > the brick logs of the rejected > >> > > > > > > > > server. Well, not surprising as > no > >> > > > brick process is running. The > >> > > > > > > > > server gluster1 is still in > rejected > >> > > > state. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > 'gluster volume start workdata > force' > >> > > > starts the brick process on > >> > > > > > > > > gluster1, and some heals are > happening > >> > > > on gluster2+3, but via 'gluster > >> > > > > > > > > volume status workdata' the > volumes > >> > > > still aren't complete. > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > gluster1: > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > > > > > > > > Brick > gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> > > > 49152 0 Y 2523 > >> > > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost > >> > > > N/A N/A Y 2549 > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > gluster2: > >> > > > > > > > > Gluster process > >> > > > TCP Port RDMA Port Online Pid > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > > > > > > > > Brick > gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> > > > 49153 0 Y 1723 > >> > > > > > > > > Brick > gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata > >> > > > 49153 0 Y 2068 > >> > > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost > >> > > > N/A N/A Y 1732 > >> > > > > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on gluster3 > >> > > > N/A N/A Y 2077 > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Hubert > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > Am Di., 5. M?rz 2019 um 07:58 > Uhr > >> > > > schrieb Milind Changire < > mchangir at redhat.com > >> > > > <mailto:mchangir at redhat.com>>: > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > There are probably DNS > entries or > >> > > > /etc/hosts entries with the public IP > Addresses > >> > > > that the host names (gluster1, gluster2, > >> > > > gluster3) are getting resolved to. > >> > > > > > > > > > /etc/resolv.conf would tell > which is > >> > > > the default domain searched for the node > names > >> > > > and the DNS servers which respond to the > queries. > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 12:14 > PM Hu > >> > > > Bert <revirii at googlemail.com > >> > > > <mailto:revirii at googlemail.com>> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> Good morning, > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> i have a replicate 3 setup > with 2 > >> > > > volumes, running on version 5.3 on > >> > > > > > > > > >> debian stretch. This morning > i > >> > > > upgraded one server to version 5.4 and > >> > > > > > > > > >> rebooted the machine; after > the > >> > > > restart i noticed that: > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> - no brick process is running > >> > > > > > > > > >> - gluster volume status only > shows > >> > > > the server itself: > >> > > > > > > > > >> gluster volume status > workdata > >> > > > > > > > > >> Status of volume: workdata > >> > > > > > > > > >> Gluster process > >> > > > TCP Port RDMA Port Online Pid > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > > > > > > > > >> Brick > >> > > > gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata N/A > >> > > > N/A N N/A > >> > > > > > > > > >> NFS Server on localhost > >> > > > N/A N/A N N/A > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> - gluster peer status on the > server > >> > > > > > > > > >> gluster peer status > >> > > > > > > > > >> Number of Peers: 2 > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster3 > >> > > > > > > > > >> Uuid: > >> > > > c7b4a448-ca6a-4051-877f-788f9ee9bc4a > >> > > > > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected > (Connected) > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster2 > >> > > > > > > > > >> Uuid: > >> > > > 162fea82-406a-4f51-81a3-e90235d8da27 > >> > > > > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected > (Connected) > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> - gluster peer status on the > other > >> > > > 2 servers: > >> > > > > > > > > >> gluster peer status > >> > > > > > > > > >> Number of Peers: 2 > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster1 > >> > > > > > > > > >> Uuid: > >> > > > 9a360776-7b58-49ae-831e-a0ce4e4afbef > >> > > > > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected > (Connected) > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster3 > >> > > > > > > > > >> Uuid: > >> > > > c7b4a448-ca6a-4051-877f-788f9ee9bc4a > >> > > > > > > > > >> State: Peer in Cluster > (Connected) > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> I noticed that, in the brick > logs, > >> > > > i see that the public IP is used > >> > > > > > > > > >> instead of the LAN IP. brick > logs > >> > > > from one of the volumes: > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> rejected node: > >> > > > https://pastebin.com/qkpj10Sd > >> > > > > > > > > >> connected nodes: > >> > > > https://pastebin.com/8SxVVYFV > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> Why is the public IP > suddenly used > >> > > > instead of the LAN IP? Killing all > >> > > > > > > > > >> gluster processes and > rebooting > >> > > > (again) didn't help. > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > > >> Thx, > >> > > > > > > > > >> Hubert > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > > > > >> Gluster-users mailing list > >> > > > > > > > > >> Gluster-users at gluster.org > >> > > > <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > >> > > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > >> > > > > > > > > > Milind > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > > > > > Gluster-users mailing list > >> > > > > > > > Gluster-users at gluster.org > >> > > > <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org> > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- > >> > > > > > > Regards, > >> > > > > > > Hari Gowtham. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > Regards, > >> > > > > Hari Gowtham. > >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > Gluster-users mailing list > >> > > > Gluster-users at gluster.org > >> > > > <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org> > >> > > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > >> > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > Gluster-users mailing list > >> > > > Gluster-users at gluster.org <mailto: > Gluster-users at gluster.org> > >> > > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > Amar Tumballi (amarts) > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > > Gluster-users mailing list > >> > > > Gluster-users at gluster.org > >> > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > >> > > > > >> > > _______________________________________________ > >> > > Gluster-users mailing list > >> > > Gluster-users at gluster.org > >> > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users > > > > > > > > -- > > Amar Tumballi (amarts) >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20190319/e0cb65ce/attachment.html>