search for: amudhan

...remember the BZ's for those issues. As glusterfs 3.10.1 is an old version, I would request you to please upgrade it to latest one. I am sure this would have fix . ---- Ashish ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nithya Balachandran" <nbalacha at redhat.com> To: "Amudhan P" <amudhan83 at gmail.com>, "Ashish Pandey" <aspandey at redhat.com> Cc: "Amudhan Pandian" <amudh_an at hotmail.com>, gluster-users at gluster.org Sent: Monday, November 13, 2017 7:14:30 PM Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Error logged in fuse-mount log fi...

Hi Nithya, I have checked gfid in all the bricks in disperse set for the folder. it all same there is no difference. regards Amudhan P On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 9:02 AM, Nithya Balachandran <nbalacha at redhat.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Comments inline. > > Regards, > Nithya > > On 9 November 2017 at 15:05, Amudhan Pandian <amudh_an at hotmail.com> wrote: > >> resending mail from anothe...

...3.10.1 is an old version, I would request you to please > upgrade it to latest one. I am sure this > would have fix . > > ---- > Ashish > > > > > ------------------------------ > *From: *"Nithya Balachandran" <nbalacha at redhat.com> > *To: *"Amudhan P" <amudhan83 at gmail.com>, "Ashish Pandey" < > aspandey at redhat.com> > *Cc: *"Amudhan Pandian" <amudh_an at hotmail.com>, gluster-users at gluster.org > *Sent: *Monday, November 13, 2017 7:14:30 PM > *Subject: *Re: [Gluster-users] Error log...

...f the available blocks in other nodes. my question is "file1" sha256 value matches bitrot signature value but still, it is also marked as bad by scrubber daemon. why is that? On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Kotresh Hiremath Ravishankar < khiremat at redhat.com> wrote: > Hi Amudhan, > > Sorry for the late response as I was busy with other things. You are right > bitrot uses sha256 for checksum. > If file-1, file-2 are marked bad, the I/O should be errored out with EIO. > If that is not happening, we need > to look further into it. But what's the file con...

Adding Ashish . Hi Amudhan, Can you check the gfids for every dir in that heirarchy? Maybe one of the parent dirs has a gfid mismatch. Regards, Nithya On 13 November 2017 at 17:39, Amudhan P <amudhan83 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Nithya, > > I have checked gfid in all the bricks in disperse set for the folde...

resending mail. On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Amudhan P <amudhan83 at gmail.com> wrote: > ok, from bitrot code I figured out gluster using sha256 hashing algo. > > > Now coming to the problem, during scrub run in my cluster some of my files > were marked as bad in few set of nodes. > I just wanted to confirm bad file. so, I ha...

Hi Amudhan, Sorry for the late response as I was busy with other things. You are right bitrot uses sha256 for checksum. If file-1, file-2 are marked bad, the I/O should be errored out with EIO. If that is not happening, we need to look further into it. But what's the file contents of file-1 and file-2 on...

Any update? On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Amudhan P <amudhan83 at gmail.com> wrote: > any update?. > > why is it marked bad? > > Any way to find out what happened to the file? > > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Amudhan P <amudhan83 at gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> my volume is distributed dispers...

resending mail from another id, doubt on whether mail reaches mailing list. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Amudhan P <amudhan83 at gmail.com<mailto:amudhan83 at gmail.com>> Date: Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 6:43 PM Subject: error logged in fuse-mount log file To: Gluster Users <gluster-users at gluster.org<mailto:gluster-users at gluster.org>> Hi, I am using glusterfs 3.10.1 and i am seeing b...

Hi, I have a file in my brick which was signed by bitrot and latter when running scrub it was marked as bad. Now, I want to verify file again manually. just to clarify my doubt how can I do this? regards Amudhan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170921/f69ff7be/attachment.html>

Hi, Comments inline. Regards, Nithya On 9 November 2017 at 15:05, Amudhan Pandian <amudh_an at hotmail.com> wrote: > resending mail from another id, doubt on whether mail reaches mailing list. > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: *Amudhan P* <amudhan83 at gmail.com> > Date: Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 6:43 PM > Subject: error lo...

...fc96 trusted.ec.version=0x0000000000001a980000000000001a99 trusted.gfid=0x10d8920e42cd42cf9448b8bf3941c192 most of the bitrot bad files are in the set of new nodes and data were uploaded using gluster 3.10.1. no drive issues are any kind of error msgs in logs. what could be gone wrong? regards Amudhan On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Amudhan P <amudhan83 at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I have a file in my brick which was signed by bitrot and latter when > running scrub it was marked as bad. > > Now, I want to verify file again manually. just to clarify my doubt > >...

Based on this BZ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1414287 it has been fixed in glusterfs-3.11.0 --- Ashish ----- Original Message ----- From: "Amudhan P" <amudhan83 at gmail.com> To: "Ashish Pandey" <aspandey at redhat.com> Cc: "Gluster Users" <gluster-users at gluster.org> Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2017 1:07:16 PM Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] error msg in the glustershd.log Ashish, which version...

Ashish, which version has this issue fixed? On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Amudhan P <amudhan83 at gmail.com> wrote: > I am using 3.10.1 from which version this update is available. > > > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 5:03 PM, Ashish Pandey <aspandey at redhat.com> > wrote: > >> >> Whenever we do some fop on EC volume on a file, we check the x...

...rence is not reliable but still we are triggering heal and that > is why you are seeing these messages. > > We have fixed it in latest release https://review.gluster.org/16468 > Now, we check if fop actually needs heal or not. > > ---- > Ashish > > > > *From: *"Amudhan P" <amudhan83 at gmail.com> > *To: *"Gluster Users" <gluster-users at gluster.org> > *Sent: *Tuesday, August 29, 2017 4:47:10 PM > *Subject: *[Gluster-users] error msg in the glustershd.log > > > Hi , > > I need some clarification for below error m...

Hi Amudhan, Please go through the following that would clarify up-gradation concerns from DHT to RIO in 4.0 1. RIO would not deprecate DHT. Both DHT and RIO would co-exist. 2. DHT volumes would not be migrated to RIO. DHT volumes would still be using DHT code. 3. The new volume creation should...

...fop are different for some bricks. This difference is not reliable but still we are triggering heal and that is why you are seeing these messages. We have fixed it in latest release https://review.gluster.org/16468 Now, we check if fop actually needs heal or not. ---- Ashish From: "Amudhan P" <amudhan83 at gmail.com> To: "Gluster Users" <gluster-users at gluster.org> Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2017 4:47:10 PM Subject: [Gluster-users] error msg in the glustershd.log Hi , I need some clarification for below error msg in the glustershd.log file. What is...

...611356412-11207221728611356412, links: 1-1, uid: 0-0, gid: 0-0, rdev: 0-0, size: 314900480-314867712, mode: 100755-100755) [2017-08-29 11:02:37.055255] N [MSGID: 122029] [ec-generic.c:684:ec_combine_lookup] 0-glustervol-disperse-116: Mismatching iatt in answers of 'GF_FOP_LOOKUP' regards, Amudhan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170829/1f6d3829/attachment.html>

does RIO improves folder listing and rebalance, when compared to 3.x? if yes, do you have any performance data comparing RIO and DHT? On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 4:12 PM, Kaushal M <kshlmster at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Amudhan P <amudhan83 at gmail.com> wrote: > > if doing an upgrade from 3.10.1 to 4.0 or 4.1, will I be able to access > > volume without any challenge? > > > > I am asking this because 4.0 comes with DHT2? > > Very short answer, yes. Your volumes will remain the same. An...

On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 4:00 PM, Amudhan P <amudhan83 at gmail.com> wrote: > if doing an upgrade from 3.10.1 to 4.0 or 4.1, will I be able to access > volume without any challenge? > > I am asking this because 4.0 comes with DHT2? Very short answer, yes. Your volumes will remain the same. And you will continue to access...