thr3ads.net - samba - [Samba] glusterfs + ctdb + nfs-ganesha , unplug the network cable of serving node, takes around ~20 mins for IO to resume [Mar 2019]

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

Liu, Dan

2019-Feb-25 02:43 UTC

[Samba] glusterfs + ctdb + nfs-ganesha , unplug the network cable of serving node, takes around ~20 mins for IO to resume

Hi all

We did some failover/failback tests on 2 nodesï¿½ï¿½A and Bï¿½ï¿½ with
architecture 'glusterfs + ctdb(public address) + nfs-ganesha'ï¿½ï¿½

1st:
During write, unplug the network cable of serving node A
->NFS Client took a few seconds to recover to conitinue writing.

After some minutes, plug the network cable of serving node A
->NFS Client also took a few seconds to recover to conitinue writing.

2nd:
During write, unplug the network cable of serving node A
->NFS Client took 20 minutes to recover to conitinue writing.
It is too slow for clients to accept the recovery timeï¿½ï¿½

From CTDB log, during failover and failback, fail node failed to kill the
connection with client
while recovery node failed to send ï¿½ï¿½tickle ackï¿½ï¿½to client to
re-established connection.

So during 1~3s ï¿½ï¿½takeover is failedï¿½ï¿½
Why is it failed to fast recovery and took 20 minutes to recovery successfully.
Is there anyone knows the reason?
We are looking forward to your reply. Thanks.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is some test logs and configuration.
Node Aï¿½ï¿½
cat /var/log/log.ctdb
2019/02/22 18:00:57.468629 ctdbd[18309]: Release of IP 10.10.11.51/24 on
interface eth3  node:1
2019/02/22 18:01:02.132565 ctdbd[18309]: Monitoring event was cancelled
2019/02/22 18:01:02.547046 ctdb-eventd[18310]: 10.interface: Killing TCP
connection ::ffff:10.10.11.18:951 ::ffff:10.10.11.51:2049
2019/02/22 18:01:02.547112 ctdb-eventd[18310]: 10.interface: Failed sendto (No
route to host)
...
2019/02/22 18:01:02.547259 ctdb-eventd[18310]: 10.interface: Failed sendto (No
route to host)
2019/02/22 18:01:02.548458 ctdb-eventd[18310]: 10.interface: Failed to kill TCP
connections for IP 10.10.11.51 (1/1 remaining)
2019/02/22 18:01:02.680399 ctdb-eventd[18310]: 60.nfs: method return
time=1550829662.675715 sender=:1.1803 -> destination=:1.1819 serial=445
reply_serial=2
2019/02/22 18:01:02.680479 ctdb-eventd[18310]: 60.nfs:    boolean true
2019/02/22 18:01:02.680500 ctdb-eventd[18310]: 60.nfs:    string "Started
grace period"
2019/02/22 18:01:03.255313 ctdb-eventd[18310]: 60.nfs: Reconfiguring service
"nfs"...
2019/02/22 18:01:03.353830 ctdb-recoverd[18402]: Takeover run completed
successfully
2019/02/22 18:01:05.345783 ctdbd[18309]: Starting traverse on DB ctdb.tdb (id
9809)
2019/02/22 18:01:05.348204 ctdbd[18309]: Ending traverse on DB ctdb.tdb (id
9809), records 1

Node Bï¿½ï¿½
cat /var/log/log.ctdb
2019/02/22 18:01:02.699755 ctdbd[29541]: Takeover of IP 10.10.11.51/24 on
interface eth3
2019/02/22 18:01:02.701360 ctdbd[29541]: Monitoring event was cancelled
2019/02/22 18:01:03.010811 ctdb-eventd[29542]: 60.nfs: removed
ï¿½ï¿½/mnt/mgt_vol/grp45/nfs_state/nfs-ganesha/.noderefs/10.10.11.51ï¿½ï¿½
2019/02/22 18:01:03.010896 ctdb-eventd[29542]: 60.nfs:
ï¿½ï¿½/mnt/mgt_vol/grp45/nfs_state/nfs-ganesha/.noderefs/10.10.11.51ï¿½ï¿½ ->
ï¿½ï¿½/mnt/mgt_vol/grp45/nfs_state/nfs-ganesha/node-4ï¿½ï¿½
2019/02/22 18:01:03.010922 ctdb-eventd[29542]: 60.nfs: method return
time=1550829663.005719 sender=:1.192 -> destination=:1.206 serial=438
reply_serial=2
2019/02/22 18:01:03.010937 ctdb-eventd[29542]: 60.nfs:    boolean true
2019/02/22 18:01:03.010973 ctdb-eventd[29542]: 60.nfs:    string "Started
grace period"
2019/02/22 18:01:03.065121 ctdbd[29541]: Failed sendto (No route to host)
2019/02/22 18:01:03.065191 ctdbd[29541]: ../ctdb/server/ctdb_takeover.c:388
Failed to send tcp tickle ack for ::ffff:10.10.11.18
2019/02/22 18:01:03.303342 ctdb-eventd[29542]: 60.nfs: Reconfiguring service
"nfs"...
2019/02/22 18:01:03.347137 ctdb-recoverd[29647]: Reenabling takeover runs
2019/02/22 18:01:04.172108 ctdbd[29541]: Failed sendto (No route to host)
2019/02/22 18:01:04.172180 ctdbd[29541]: ../ctdb/server/ctdb_takeover.c:388
Failed to send tcp tickle ack for ::ffff:10.10.11.18
2019/02/22 18:01:05.278093 ctdbd[29541]: Failed sendto (No route to host)
2019/02/22 18:01:05.278159 ctdbd[29541]: ../ctdb/server/ctdb_takeover.c:388
Failed to send tcp tickle ack for ::ffff:10.10.11.18
2019/02/22 18:01:05.389656 ctdbd[29541]: Starting traverse on DB ctdb.tdb (id
6238)
2019/02/22 18:01:05.392182 ctdbd[29541]: Ending traverse on DB ctdb.tdb (id
6238), records 1

cat /etc/sysconfig/ctdb
CTDB_RECOVERY_LOCK=/mnt/mgt_vol/grp45/lockfile
CTDB_PUBLIC_INTERFACE=eth3
CTDB_NODES=/mnt/mgt_vol/grp45/nodes
CTDB_PUBLIC_ADDRESSES=/mnt/mgt_vol/grp45/public_addresses
CTDB_MANAGES_SAMBA=yes
CTDB_MANAGES_WINBIND=no
CTDB_MANAGES_VSFTP=yes
CTDB_SAMBA_SKIP_SHARE_CHECK=yes
CTDB_MANAGES_NFS=yes
CTDB_NFS_CALLOUT=/etc/ctdb/nfs-ganesha-callout
CTDB_NFS_STATE_FS_TYPE=glusterfs
CTDB_NFS_CHECKS_DIR=/etc/ctdb/nfs-checks-ganesha.d/
CTDB_NFS_STATE_MNT=/mnt/mgt_vol/grp45/nfs_state
CTDB_NFS_SKIP_SHARE_CHECK=yes
CTDB_SET_KeepaliveLimit=1

cat /mnt/mgt_vol/grp45/nodes
192.168.100.15 #inner network
192.168.100.14 #inner network

cat /mnt/mgt_vol/grp45/public_addresses
10.10.11.50/24 eth3 #extranet network
10.10.11.51/24 eth3 #extranet network


ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Ï¡ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½í¤·ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½îŠ¤ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½Þ¤ï¿½ï¿½ï¿½
--------------------------------------------------
**************************************************
Liu Dan
PF Dept
Nanjing Fujitsu Nanda Software Tech.Co.,Ltd.(FNST)
TELï¿½ï¿½+86+25-86630566-8512
FUJITSU INTERNALï¿½ï¿½79955-8512
EMail: liud.fnst at cn.fujitsu.com<mailto:liud.fnst at cn.fujitsu.com>
**************************************************
--------------------------------------------------

Martin Schwenke

2019-Mar-04 05:54 UTC

head link

[Samba] glusterfs + ctdb + nfs-ganesha , unplug the network cable of serving node, takes around ~20 mins for IO to resume

Hi Dan,

On Mon, 25 Feb 2019 02:43:31 +0000, "Liu, Dan via samba"
<samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
> We did some failover/failback tests on 2 nodes（A and B） with
> architecture 'glusterfs + ctdb(public address) + nfs-ganesha'。
> 
> 1st:
> During write, unplug the network cable of serving node A
> ->NFS Client took a few seconds to recover to conitinue writing.  
> 
> After some minutes, plug the network cable of serving node A
> ->NFS Client also took a few seconds to recover to conitinue
> writing.  
> 
> 2nd:
> During write, unplug the network cable of serving node A
> ->NFS Client took 20 minutes to recover to conitinue writing.  
> It is too slow for clients to accept the recovery time。
Definitely!  What was different between "1st" and "2nd"? 
Were they
testing different scenarios?
> From CTDB log, during failover and failback, fail node failed to kill
> the connection with client while recovery node failed to send ‘tickle
> ack’to client to re-established connection.
The first really isn't a problem.  I'm not sure why CTDB attempts to do
a 2 way kill from the releasing node.  We're going to stop doing that
in the future.

The 2nd is a mystery.  Are you sure the network connection on node B
was up?  This message seems to indicate the network is down:

  2019/02/22 18:01:03.065121 ctdbd[29541]: Failed sendto (No route to host)
2019/02/22 18:01:03.065191 ctdbd[29541]: ../ctdb/server/ctdb_takeover.c:388
Failed to send tcp tickle ack for ::ffff:10.10.11.18

peace & happiness,
martin

Liu, Dan

2019-Mar-04 08:38 UTC

head link

[Samba] glusterfs + ctdb + nfs-ganesha , unplug the network cable of serving node, takes around ~20 mins for IO to resume

Martin

Thanks for replying.
> > We did some failover/failback tests on 2 nodes（A and B） with
> > architecture 'glusterfs + ctdb(public address) + nfs-ganesha'。
> >
> > 1st:
> > During write, unplug the network cable of serving node A
> > ->NFS Client took a few seconds to recover to conitinue writing.
> >
> > After some minutes, plug the network cable of serving node A
> > ->NFS Client also took a few seconds to recover to conitinue
> > writing.
> >
> > 2nd:
> > During write, unplug the network cable of serving node A
> > ->NFS Client took 20 minutes to recover to conitinue writing.
> > It is too slow for clients to accept the recovery time。
> 
> Definitely!  What was different between "1st" and
"2nd"?  Were they testing
> different scenarios?
"1st" and "2nd" is tested in the same scenarios.
After we updated the client(Mac mini)'s os to Mojave v10.14.3(the problem
happened on v10.10), not like '2nd',
all the take over took very few minutes to finish. 
So I'm think that the ~20 mins take over might be the client's problem. 

> > From CTDB log, during failover and failback, fail node failed to kill
> > the connection with client while recovery node failed to send ‘tickle
> > ack’to client to re-established connection.
> 
> The first really isn't a problem.  I'm not sure why CTDB attempts
to do
> a 2 way kill from the releasing node.  We're going to stop doing that
in
> the future.
> 
> The 2nd is a mystery.  Are you sure the network connection on node B was
> up?  This message seems to indicate the network is down:
> 
>   2019/02/22 18:01:03.065121 ctdbd[29541]: Failed sendto (No route to host)
> 2019/02/22 18:01:03.065191
> ctdbd[29541]: ../ctdb/server/ctdb_takeover.c:388 Failed to send tcp
> tickle ack for ::ffff:10.10.11.18All the test procedure, we just unplug the node A's network.
From all the test's ctdb log(over 10 times), during every takeover there was
such log to be outputed.
When the tickle ACK was sent, because takeover is successful after some minutes,
I'm think that the node B's was up, but not sure..

Best Regards
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin Schwenke [mailto:martin at meltin.net]
> Sent: Monday, March 4, 2019 1:55 PM
> To: Liu, Dan/刘 丹 <liud.fnst at cn.fujitsu.com>
> Cc: samba at lists.samba.org
> Subject: Re: [Samba] glusterfs + ctdb + nfs-ganesha , unplug the network
> cable of serving node, takes around ~20 mins for IO to resume
> 
> Hi Dan,
> 
> On Mon, 25 Feb 2019 02:43:31 +0000, "Liu, Dan via samba"
> <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote:
> 
> > We did some failover/failback tests on 2 nodes（A and B） with
> > architecture 'glusterfs + ctdb(public address) + nfs-ganesha'。
> >
> > 1st:
> > During write, unplug the network cable of serving node A
> > ->NFS Client took a few seconds to recover to conitinue writing.
> >
> > After some minutes, plug the network cable of serving node A
> > ->NFS Client also took a few seconds to recover to conitinue
> > writing.
> >
> > 2nd:
> > During write, unplug the network cable of serving node A
> > ->NFS Client took 20 minutes to recover to conitinue writing.
> > It is too slow for clients to accept the recovery time。
> 
> Definitely!  What was different between "1st" and
"2nd"?  Were they testing
> different scenarios?
> 
> > From CTDB log, during failover and failback, fail node failed to kill
> > the connection with client while recovery node failed to send ‘tickle
> > ack’to client to re-established connection.
> 
> The first really isn't a problem.  I'm not sure why CTDB attempts
to do
> a 2 way kill from the releasing node.  We're going to stop doing that
in
> the future.
> 
> The 2nd is a mystery.  Are you sure the network connection on node B was
> up?  This message seems to indicate the network is down:
> 
>   2019/02/22 18:01:03.065121 ctdbd[29541]: Failed sendto (No route to host)
> 2019/02/22 18:01:03.065191
> ctdbd[29541]: ../ctdb/server/ctdb_takeover.c:388 Failed to send tcp
> tickle ack for ::ffff:10.10.11.18
> 
> peace & happiness,
> martin
>

Seemingly Similar Threads

Search for more apparently analagous threads

samba - Mar 2019 - glusterfs + ctdb + nfs-ganesha , unplug the network cable of serving node, takes around ~20 mins for IO to resume

[Samba] glusterfs + ctdb + nfs-ganesha , unplug the network cable of serving node, takes around ~20 mins for IO to resume

[Samba] glusterfs + ctdb + nfs-ganesha , unplug the network cable of serving node, takes around ~20 mins for IO to resume

[Samba] glusterfs + ctdb + nfs-ganesha , unplug the network cable of serving node, takes around ~20 mins for IO to resume

Seemingly Similar Threads