similar to: shard corruption bug

What shard corruption bug? bugzilla url? I'm running into some odd behavior in my lab with shards and RHEV/KVM data, trying to figure out if it's related. Thanks. On Fri, May 4, 2018 at 11:13 AM, Jim Kinney <jim.kinney at gmail.com> wrote: > I upgraded my ovirt stack to 3.12.9, added a brick to a volume and left it > to settle. No problems. I am now running replica 4

https://docs.gluster.org/en/latest/release-notes/3.12.6/ The major issue in 3.12.6 is not present in 3.12.7. Bugzilla ID listed in link. On May 29, 2018 8:50:56 PM EDT, Dan Lavu <dan at redhat.com> wrote: >What shard corruption bug? bugzilla url? I'm running into some odd >behavior >in my lab with shards and RHEV/KVM data, trying to figure out if it's >related. >

Il giorno ven 4 mag 2018 alle ore 14:06 Jim Kinney <jim.kinney at gmail.com> ha scritto: > It stopped being an outstanding issue at 3.12.7. I think it's now fixed. So, is not possible to extend and rebalance a working cluster with sharded data ? Can someone confirm this ? Maybe the ones that hit the bug in the past

Il dom 22 apr 2018, 10:46 Alessandro Briosi <ab1 at metalit.com> ha scritto: > Imho the easiest path would be to turn off sharding on the volume and > simply do a copy of the files (to a different directory, or rename and > then copy i.e.) > > This should simply store the files without sharding. > If you turn off sharding on a sharded volume with data in it, all sharded

It stopped being an outstanding issue at 3.12.7. I think it's now fixed. On May 4, 2018 6:28:40 AM EDT, Gandalf Corvotempesta <gandalf.corvotempesta at gmail.com> wrote: >Hi to all >is the "famous" corruption bug when sharding enabled fixed or still a >work >in progress ? >_______________________________________________ >Gluster-users mailing list

I upgraded my ovirt stack to 3.12.9, added a brick to a volume and left it to settle. No problems. I am now running replica 4 (preparing to remove a brick and host to replica 3). On Fri, 2018-05-04 at 14:24 +0000, Gandalf Corvotempesta wrote: > Il giorno ven 4 mag 2018 alle ore 14:06 Jim Kinney <jim.kinney at gmail. > com> > ha scritto: > > It stopped being an outstanding

2018-04-23 9:34 GMT+02:00 Alessandro Briosi <ab1 at metalit.com>: > Is it that really so? yes, i've opened a bug asking developers to block removal of sharding when volume has data on it or to write a huge warning message saying that data loss will happen > I thought that sharding was a extended attribute on the files created when > sharding is enabled. > > Turning off

I already tried 512MB but re-try again now and results are the same. Both without tuning; Stripe 2 replica 2: dd performs 250~ mb/s but shard gives 77mb. I attached two logs (shard and stripe logs) Note: I also noticed that you said ?order?. Do you mean when we create via volume set we have to make an order for bricks? I thought gluster handles (and do the math) itself. Gencer

So a stock ovirt with gluster install that uses sharding A. Can't safely have sharding turned off once files are in use B. Can't be expanded with additional bricks Ouch. On April 22, 2018 5:39:20 AM EDT, Gandalf Corvotempesta <gandalf.corvotempesta at gmail.com> wrote: >Il dom 22 apr 2018, 10:46 Alessandro Briosi <ab1 at metalit.com> ha >scritto: > >> Imho

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: > >

Any update about multiple bugs regarding data corruptions with sharding enabled ? Is 3.12.1 ready to be used in production?

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:

Hi, In the past couple of weeks, we've sent the following fixes concerning VM corruption upon doing rebalance - https://review.gluster.org/#/q/status:merged+project:glusterfs+branch:master+topic:bug-1440051 These fixes are very much part of the latest 3.10.2 release. Satheesaran within Red Hat also verified that they work and he's not seeing corruption issues anymore. I'd like to

Il 22/04/2018 11:39, Gandalf Corvotempesta ha scritto: > Il dom 22 apr 2018, 10:46 Alessandro Briosi <ab1 at metalit.com > <mailto:ab1 at metalit.com>> ha scritto: > > Imho the easiest path would be to turn off sharding on the volume and > simply do a copy of the files (to a different directory, or rename > and > then copy i.e.) > > This

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? > Most issues have been fixed but there appears to be one more race for which the patch is being worked on. @Krutika, is that correct? Thanks,

The short answer is - no there exists no script currently that can piece the shards together into a single file. Long answer: IMO the safest way to convert from sharded to a single file _is_ by copying the data out into a new volume at the moment. Picking up the files from the individual bricks directly and joining them, although fast, is a strict no-no for many reasons - for example, when you

Il giorno mer 9 mag 2018 alle ore 21:22 Jim Kinney <jim.kinney at gmail.com> ha scritto: > You can change the replica count. Add a fourth server, add it's brick to existing volume with gluster volume add-brick vol0 replica 4 newhost:/path/to/brick This doesn't add space, but only a new replica, increasing the number of copies

Il giorno mer 9 mag 2018 alle ore 21:31 Jim Kinney <jim.kinney at gmail.com> ha scritto: > correct. a new server will NOT add space in this manner. But the original Q was about rebalancing after adding a 4th server. If you are using distributed/replication, then yes, a new server with be adding a portion of it's space to add more space to the cluster. Wait, in a distribute-replicate,

Great news. Is this planned to be published in next release? Il 29 mag 2017 3:27 PM, "Krutika Dhananjay" <kdhananj at redhat.com> ha scritto: > Thanks for that update. Very happy to hear it ran fine without any issues. > :) > > Yeah so you can ignore those 'No such file or directory' errors. They > represent a transient state where DHT in the client process