search for: rebalanced

Hi devs, I''ve been using btrfs on my file server since 2.6.32 and after upgrading to .33 I noticed that rebalancing took way longer than before. I have a 5 disk array used for a btrfs md setup, different hard drive sizes, brands, and interfaces. The last time I rebalanced I was using about 800GB of space on the 4.6TB array, and I started before I went to sleep and it was done when I woke up. I''m in the middle of a rebalance right now, currently using 950GB, and it has been a full day and the rebalancing is not done yet. Is this an expected change? Is ther...

...Rebalance on gsae_artifactory_cluster_storage has been started successfully. Use rebalance status command to check status of the rebalance process. ID: b22572ff-7575-4557-8317-765f7e52d445 # gluster volume rebalance gsae_artifactory_cluster_storage status Node Rebalanced-files size scanned failures skipped status run time in secs --------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ -------------- localhost 0 0Bytes...

Hello, I'm having trouble migrating data from 1 removed replica set to another active one in a dist replicated volume. My test scenario is the following: - create set (A) - create a bunch of files on it - add another set (B) - rebalance (works fine) - remove-brick A - rebalance (doesn't rebalance - ran on one brick in each set) The doc seems to imply that it is possible to remove

Hi I have a five node 300 TB distributed gluster volume with zero replication. I am planning to add two more servers which will add around 120 TB. After fixing the layout, can I rebalance the volume while clients are online and accessing the data? Thanks Kashif -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On 13 December 2017 at 17:34, mohammad kashif <kashif.alig at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi > > I have a five node 300 TB distributed gluster volume with zero > replication. I am planning to add two more servers which will add around > 120 TB. After fixing the layout, can I rebalance the volume while clients > are online and accessing the data? > > Hi, Yes, you can. Are

I already posted this in the thread "ENOSPC with mkdir and rename", but now I have a device with 100GB unallocated on the "btrfs fi sh" output, and when I run a rebalance of the form: > btrfs filesystem balance start -dusage=50 -musage=10 "$mount" I get more than 75 of such stack traces contaminating the klog. I've put some of them up in a gist here:

...ge has been started successfully. Use >> rebalance status command to check status of the rebalance process. >> ID: b22572ff-7575-4557-8317-765f7e52d445 >> >> # gluster volume rebalance gsae_artifactory_cluster_storage status >> Node Rebalanced-files >> size scanned failures skipped status >> run time in secs >> --------- ----------- >> ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- >> ------------ -------------- >>...

...actory_cluster_storage has been started successfully. Use > rebalance status command to check status of the rebalance process. > ID: b22572ff-7575-4557-8317-765f7e52d445 > > # gluster volume rebalance gsae_artifactory_cluster_storage status > Node Rebalanced-files > size scanned failures skipped status > run time in secs > --------- ----------- > ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- > ------------ -------------- > loc...

...; >> rebalance status command to check status of the rebalance process. >> >> ID: b22572ff-7575-4557-8317-765f7e52d445 >> >> >> >> # gluster volume rebalance gsae_artifactory_cluster_storage status >> >> Node Rebalanced-files >> >> size scanned failures skipped status >> >> run time in secs >> >> --------- ----------- >> >> ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- >> >> ------...

After nearly 3 months, we have another preview release for GlusterD-2.0. The highlights for this release are, - GD2 now uses an auto scaling etcd cluster, which automatically selects and maintains the required number of etcd servers in the cluster. - Preliminary support for volume expansion has been added. (Note that rebalancing is not available yet) - An end to end functional testing framework

Just so I know. Is it correct to assume that this corruption issue is ONLY involved if you are doing rebalancing with sharding enabled. So if I am not doing rebalancing I should be fine? -bill On 10/3/2017 10:30 PM, Krutika Dhananjay wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Nithya Balachandran > <nbalacha at redhat.com <mailto:nbalacha at redhat.com>> wrote:

...ssfully. Use > >> rebalance status command to check status of the rebalance process. > >> ID: b22572ff-7575-4557-8317-765f7e52d445 > >> > >> # gluster volume rebalance gsae_artifactory_cluster_storage status > >> Node Rebalanced-files > >> size scanned failures skipped status > >> run time in secs > >> --------- ----------- > >> ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- > >> ------------ ---------...

I started rebalancing my volume after updating from 3.2.7 to 3.3.1. After a few hours, I noticed a large number of failures in the rebalance status: > Node Rebalanced-files size scanned failures > status > --------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ----------- > ------------ > localhost 0 0Bytes 4288805 0 > stopped > ml55 26275 206.2MB 42...

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:51 AM, Nithya Balachandran <nbalacha at redhat.com> wrote: > > > On 3 October 2017 at 13:27, Gandalf Corvotempesta < > gandalf.corvotempesta at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Any update about multiple bugs regarding data corruptions with >> sharding enabled ? >> >> Is 3.12.1 ready to be used in production? >> > >

On 4 October 2017 at 23:34, WK <wkmail at bneit.com> wrote: > Just so I know. > > Is it correct to assume that this corruption issue is ONLY involved if you > are doing rebalancing with sharding enabled. > > So if I am not doing rebalancing I should be fine? > That is correct. > -bill > > > > On 10/3/2017 10:30 PM, Krutika Dhananjay wrote: > >

Il 5 lug 2017 11:31 AM, "Kaushal M" <kshlmster at gmail.com> ha scritto: - Preliminary support for volume expansion has been added. (Note that rebalancing is not available yet) What do you mean with this? Any differences in volume expansion from the current architecture? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

Dear glusterfs experts, Recently we have encountered a self-heal daemon crash issue after rebalanced volume. Crash stack bellow: +------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ pending frames: patchset: git://git.gluster.com/glusterfs.git signal received: 11 time of crash: 2013-03-14 16:33:50 configuration details: argp 1 backtrace 1 dlfcn 1 fdatasync 1 libpthread...

So I''m writing my (dis)adventure with btrfs here hoping to help the developers or someone with similar problems. I had a btrfs filesystem at work, using two 1TB disks, raid1 for both data and metadata. A week ago one of the two disks start having hundreds of relocated sectors, so I decide to change it. I remove the failing disk, mount with -o degraded and every works fine. The day later

All, We currently have a Gluster installation which is made of 2 servers. Each server has 10 drives on ZFS. And I have a gluster mirror between these 2. The current config looks like: SERVER A-BRICK 1 replicated to SERVER B-BRICK 1 I now need to add more space and a third server. Before I do the changes, I want to know if this is a supported config. By adding a third server, I simply want to

...S3 and MS4 are pod2 and are configured with replication between them and host users 501-1000. Ideally the active connections in pod1 would be split 50/50 between MS1 and MS2. When maintenance is performed obviously all active connections/users would be moved to the other node in the pod and then rebalanced once maintenance is completed. I'm not sure if I need to use both the proxy and director, or just one or the other? If both then what is the proper path, from a network perspective? I like the functionality director provides, being able to add/remove servers on the fly and adjust connection...