[Gluster-devel] Assertion failed: lru_inode_ctx->block_num > 0
Krutika Dhananjay
kdhananj at redhat.com
Wed Dec 21 12:05:11 UTC 2016
Thanks for this. The information seems sufficient at the moment.
Will get back to you on this if/when I find something.
-Krutika
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 1:44 PM, qingwei wei <tchengwee at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Krutika,
>
> Sorry for the delay as i am busy with other works. Attached is the
> tar.gz file with client and server log, the gfid information on the
> shard folder (please look at test.0.0 file as the log is captured when
> i run fio on this file.) and also the print statement i put inside the
> code. Fyi, i did 2 runs this time and only the second run give me
> problem. Hope this information helps.
>
> Regards,
>
> Cw
>
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 8:02 PM, Krutika Dhananjay <kdhananj at redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > Good that you asked. I'll try but be warned this will involve me coming
> back
> > to you with lot more questions. :)
> >
> > I've been trying this for the past two days (not to mention the fio run
> > takes
> > really long) and so far there has been no crash/assert failure.
> >
> > If you already have the core:
> > in frame 1,
> > 0. print block_num
> > 1. get lru_inode_ctx->stat.ia_gfid
> > 2. convert it to hex
> > 3. find the gfid in your backend that corresponds to this gfid and share
> its
> > path in your response
> > 4. print priv->inode_count
> > 5. and of course lru_inode_ctx->block_num :)
> > 6. Also attach the complete brick and client logs.
> >
> > -Krutika
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 3:18 PM, qingwei wei <tchengwee at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Krutika,
> >>
> >> Do you need anymore information? Do let me know as i can try on my
> >> test system. Thanks.
> >>
> >> Cw
> >>
> >> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 12:17 AM, qingwei wei <tchengwee at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > Hi Krutika,
> >> >
> >> > You mean FIO command?
> >> >
> >> > Below is how i do the sequential write. This example i am using 400GB
> >> > file, for the SHARD_MAX_INODE=16, i use 300MB file.
> >> >
> >> > fio -group_reporting -ioengine libaio -directory /mnt/testSF-HDD1
> >> > -fallocate none -direct 1 -filesize 400g -nrfiles 1 -openfiles 1 -bs
> >> > 256k -numjobs 1 -iodepth 2 -name test -rw write
> >> >
> >> > And after FIO complete the above workload, i do the random write
> >> >
> >> > fio -group_reporting -ioengine libaio -directory /mnt/testSF-HDD1
> >> > -fallocate none -direct 1 -filesize 400g -nrfiles 1 -openfiles 1 -bs
> >> > 8k -numjobs 1 -iodepth 2 -name test -rw randwrite
> >> >
> >> > The error (Sometimes segmentation fault) only happen during random
> >> > write.
> >> >
> >> > The gluster volume is 3 replica volume with shard enable and 16MB
> >> > shard block size.
> >> >
> >> > Thanks.
> >> >
> >> > Cw
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 12:00 AM, Krutika Dhananjay
> >> > <kdhananj at redhat.com> wrote:
> >> >> I tried but couldn't recreate this issue (even with SHARD_MAX_INODES
> >> >> being
> >> >> 16).
> >> >> Could you share the exact command you used?
> >> >>
> >> >> -Krutika
> >> >>
> >> >> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 12:15 PM, qingwei wei <tchengwee at gmail.com>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Hi Krutika,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Thanks. Looking forward to your reply.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Cw
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Krutika Dhananjay
> >> >>> <kdhananj at redhat.com>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> > Hi,
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > First of all, apologies for the late reply. Couldn't find time to
> >> >>> > look
> >> >>> > into
> >> >>> > this
> >> >>> > until now.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Changing SHARD_MAX_INODES value from 12384 to 16 is a cool trick!
> >> >>> > Let me try that as well and get back to you in some time.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > -Krutika
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 11:07 AM, qingwei wei <tchengwee at gmail.com
> >
> >> >>> > wrote:
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Hi,
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> With the help from my colleague, we did some changes to the code
> >> >>> >> with
> >> >>> >> reduce number of SHARD_MAX_INODES (from 16384 to 16) and also
> >> >>> >> include
> >> >>> >> the printing of blk_num inside __shard_update_shards_inode_list.
> We
> >> >>> >> then execute fio to first do sequential write of 300MB file.
> After
> >> >>> >> this run completed, we then use fio to generate random write
> (8k).
> >> >>> >> And
> >> >>> >> during this random write run, we found that there is situation
> >> >>> >> where
> >> >>> >> the blk_num is negative number and this trigger the following
> >> >>> >> assertion.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> GF_ASSERT (lru_inode_ctx->block_num > 0);
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> [2016-12-08 03:16:34.217582] E
> >> >>> >> [shard.c:468:__shard_update_shards_inode_list]
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> (-->/usr/local/lib/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.
> so(shard_common_lookup_shards_cbk+0x2d)
> >> >>> >> [0x7f7300930b6d]
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> -->/usr/local/lib/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(
> shard_link_block_inode+0xce)
> >> >>> >> [0x7f7300930b1e]
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> -->/usr/local/lib/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(
> __shard_update_shards_inode_list+0x36b)
> >> >>> >> [0x7f730092bf5b] ) 0-: Assertion failed:
> lru_inode_ctx->block_num >
> >> >>> >> 0
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Also, there is segmentation fault shortly after this assertion
> and
> >> >>> >> after that fio exit with error.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> frame : type(0) op(0)
> >> >>> >> patchset: git://git.gluster.com/glusterfs.git
> >> >>> >> signal received: 11
> >> >>> >> time of crash:
> >> >>> >> 2016-12-08 03:16:34
> >> >>> >> configuration details:
> >> >>> >> argp 1
> >> >>> >> backtrace 1
> >> >>> >> dlfcn 1
> >> >>> >> libpthread 1
> >> >>> >> llistxattr 1
> >> >>> >> setfsid 1
> >> >>> >> spinlock 1
> >> >>> >> epoll.h 1
> >> >>> >> xattr.h 1
> >> >>> >> st_atim.tv_nsec 1
> >> >>> >> package-string: glusterfs 3.7.17
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> /usr/local/lib/libglusterfs.so.0(_gf_msg_backtrace_nomem+
> 0x92)[0x7f730e900332]
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> /usr/local/lib/libglusterfs.so.0(gf_print_trace+0x2d5)[
> 0x7f730e9250b5]
> >> >>> >> /lib64/libc.so.6(+0x35670)[0x7f730d1f1670]
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> /usr/local/lib/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(__
> shard_update_shards_inode_list+0x1d4)[0x7f730092bdc4]
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> /usr/local/lib/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(
> shard_link_block_inode+0xce)[0x7f7300930b1e]
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> /usr/local/lib/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(
> shard_common_lookup_shards_cbk+0x2d)[0x7f7300930b6d]
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> /usr/local/lib/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/cluster/distribute.
> so(dht_lookup_cbk+0x380)[0x7f7300b8e240]
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> /usr/local/lib/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/protocol/client.so(
> client3_3_lookup_cbk+0x769)[0x7f7300df4989]
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> /usr/local/lib/libgfrpc.so.0(rpc_clnt_handle_reply+0x90)[
> 0x7f730e6ce010]
> >> >>> >> /usr/local/lib/libgfrpc.so.0(rpc_clnt_notify+0x1df)[
> 0x7f730e6ce2ef]
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> /usr/local/lib/libgfrpc.so.0(rpc_transport_notify+0x23)[
> 0x7f730e6ca483]
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> /usr/local/lib/glusterfs/3.7.17/rpc-transport/socket.so(+
> 0x6344)[0x7f73034dc344]
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> /usr/local/lib/glusterfs/3.7.17/rpc-transport/socket.so(+
> 0x8f44)[0x7f73034def44]
> >> >>> >> /usr/local/lib/libglusterfs.so.0(+0x925aa)[0x7f730e96c5aa]
> >> >>> >> /lib64/libpthread.so.0(+0x7dc5)[0x7f730d96ddc5]
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Core dump:
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Using host libthread_db library "/lib64/libthread_db.so.1".
> >> >>> >> Core was generated by `/usr/local/sbin/glusterfs
> >> >>> >> --volfile-server=10.217.242.32 --volfile-id=/testSF1'.
> >> >>> >> Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault.
> >> >>> >> #0 list_del_init (old=0x7f72f4003de0) at
> >> >>> >> ../../../../libglusterfs/src/list.h:87
> >> >>> >> 87 old->prev->next = old->next;
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> bt
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> #0 list_del_init (old=0x7f72f4003de0) at
> >> >>> >> ../../../../libglusterfs/src/list.h:87
> >> >>> >> #1 __shard_update_shards_inode_list
> >> >>> >> (linked_inode=linked_inode at entry=0x7f72fa7a6e48,
> >> >>> >> this=this at entry=0x7f72fc0090c0, base_inode=0x7f72fa7a5108,
> >> >>> >> block_num=block_num at entry=10) at shard.c:469
> >> >>> >> #2 0x00007f7300930b1e in shard_link_block_inode
> >> >>> >> (local=local at entry=0x7f730ec4ed00, block_num=10,
> inode=<optimized
> >> >>> >> out>,
> >> >>> >> buf=buf at entry=0x7f730180c990) at shard.c:1559
> >> >>> >> #3 0x00007f7300930b6d in shard_common_lookup_shards_cbk
> >> >>> >> (frame=0x7f730c611204, cookie=<optimized out>,
> this=0x7f72fc0090c0,
> >> >>> >> op_ret=0,
> >> >>> >> op_errno=<optimized out>, inode=<optimized out>,
> >> >>> >> buf=0x7f730180c990, xdata=0x7f730c029cdc,
> >> >>> >> postparent=0x7f730180ca00)
> >> >>> >> at shard.c:1596
> >> >>> >> #4 0x00007f7300b8e240 in dht_lookup_cbk (frame=0x7f730c61dc40,
> >> >>> >> cookie=<optimized out>, this=<optimized out>, op_ret=0,
> >> >>> >> op_errno=22,
> >> >>> >> inode=0x7f72fa7a6e48, stbuf=0x7f730180c990,
> >> >>> >> xattr=0x7f730c029cdc,
> >> >>> >> postparent=0x7f730180ca00) at dht-common.c:2362
> >> >>> >> #5 0x00007f7300df4989 in client3_3_lookup_cbk (req=<optimized
> >> >>> >> out>,
> >> >>> >> iov=<optimized out>, count=<optimized out>,
> myframe=0x7f730c616ab4)
> >> >>> >> at client-rpc-fops.c:2988
> >> >>> >> #6 0x00007f730e6ce010 in rpc_clnt_handle_reply
> >> >>> >> (clnt=clnt at entry=0x7f72fc04c040,
> >> >>> >> pollin=pollin at entry=0x7f72fc079560)
> >> >>> >> at rpc-clnt.c:796
> >> >>> >> #7 0x00007f730e6ce2ef in rpc_clnt_notify (trans=<optimized out>,
> >> >>> >> mydata=0x7f72fc04c070, event=<optimized out>,
> data=0x7f72fc079560)
> >> >>> >> at rpc-clnt.c:967
> >> >>> >> #8 0x00007f730e6ca483 in rpc_transport_notify
> >> >>> >> (this=this at entry=0x7f72fc05bd30,
> >> >>> >> event=event at entry=RPC_TRANSPORT_MSG_RECEIVED,
> >> >>> >> data=data at entry=0x7f72fc079560) at rpc-transport.c:546
> >> >>> >> #9 0x00007f73034dc344 in socket_event_poll_in
> >> >>> >> (this=this at entry=0x7f72fc05bd30) at socket.c:2250
> >> >>> >> #10 0x00007f73034def44 in socket_event_handler (fd=fd at entry=10,
> >> >>> >> idx=idx at entry=2, data=0x7f72fc05bd30, poll_in=1, poll_out=0,
> >> >>> >> poll_err=0)
> >> >>> >> at socket.c:2363
> >> >>> >> #11 0x00007f730e96c5aa in event_dispatch_epoll_handler
> >> >>> >> (event=0x7f730180ced0, event_pool=0xf42ee0) at event-epoll.c:575
> >> >>> >> #12 event_dispatch_epoll_worker (data=0xf8d650) at
> >> >>> >> event-epoll.c:678
> >> >>> >> #13 0x00007f730d96ddc5 in start_thread () from
> >> >>> >> /lib64/libpthread.so.0
> >> >>> >> #14 0x00007f730d2b2ced in clone () from /lib64/libc.so.6
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> It seems like there is some situation where the structure is not
> >> >>> >> intialized properly? Appreciate if anyone can advice. Thanks.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Cw
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> On Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 9:42 AM, qingwei wei <tchengwee at gmail.com
> >
> >> >>> >> wrote:
> >> >>> >> > Hi,
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > I did another test and this time FIO fails with
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > fio: io_u error on file /mnt/testSF-HDD1/test: Invalid
> argument:
> >> >>> >> > write
> >> >>> >> > offset=114423242752, buflen=8192
> >> >>> >> > fio: pid=10052, err=22/file:io_u.c:1582, func=io_u error,
> >> >>> >> > error=Invalid
> >> >>> >> > argument
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err=22 (file:io_u.c:1582, func=io_u
> >> >>> >> > error,
> >> >>> >> > error=Invalid argument): pid=10052: Tue Dec 6 15:18:47 2016
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > Below is the client log:
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > [2016-12-06 05:19:31.261289] I
> >> >>> >> > [fuse-bridge.c:5171:fuse_graph_setup]
> >> >>> >> > 0-fuse: switched to graph 0
> >> >>> >> > [2016-12-06 05:19:31.261355] I [MSGID: 114035]
> >> >>> >> > [client-handshake.c:193:client_set_lk_version_cbk]
> >> >>> >> > 0-testSF-HDD-client-5: Server lk version = 1
> >> >>> >> > [2016-12-06 05:19:31.261404] I [fuse-bridge.c:4083:fuse_init]
> >> >>> >> > 0-glusterfs-fuse: FUSE inited with protocol versions: glusterfs
> >> >>> >> > 7.22
> >> >>> >> > kernel 7.22
> >> >>> >> > [2016-12-06 05:19:31.262901] I [MSGID: 108031]
> >> >>> >> > [afr-common.c:2071:afr_local_discovery_cbk]
> >> >>> >> > 0-testSF-HDD-replicate-0:
> >> >>> >> > selecting local read_child testSF-HDD-client-1
> >> >>> >> > [2016-12-06 05:19:31.262930] I [MSGID: 108031]
> >> >>> >> > [afr-common.c:2071:afr_local_discovery_cbk]
> >> >>> >> > 0-testSF-HDD-replicate-0:
> >> >>> >> > selecting local read_child testSF-HDD-client-0
> >> >>> >> > [2016-12-06 05:19:31.262948] I [MSGID: 108031]
> >> >>> >> > [afr-common.c:2071:afr_local_discovery_cbk]
> >> >>> >> > 0-testSF-HDD-replicate-0:
> >> >>> >> > selecting local read_child testSF-HDD-client-2
> >> >>> >> > [2016-12-06 05:19:31.269592] I [MSGID: 108031]
> >> >>> >> > [afr-common.c:2071:afr_local_discovery_cbk]
> >> >>> >> > 0-testSF-HDD-replicate-1:
> >> >>> >> > selecting local read_child testSF-HDD-client-3
> >> >>> >> > [2016-12-06 05:19:31.269795] I [MSGID: 108031]
> >> >>> >> > [afr-common.c:2071:afr_local_discovery_cbk]
> >> >>> >> > 0-testSF-HDD-replicate-1:
> >> >>> >> > selecting local read_child testSF-HDD-client-4
> >> >>> >> > [2016-12-06 05:19:31.277763] I [MSGID: 108031]
> >> >>> >> > [afr-common.c:2071:afr_local_discovery_cbk]
> >> >>> >> > 0-testSF-HDD-replicate-1:
> >> >>> >> > selecting local read_child testSF-HDD-client-5
> >> >>> >> > [2016-12-06 06:58:05.399244] W [MSGID: 101159]
> >> >>> >> > [inode.c:1219:__inode_unlink] 0-inode:
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > be318638-e8a0-4c6d-977d-7a937aa84806/864c9ea1-3a7e-
> 4d41-899b-f30604a7584e.16284:
> >> >>> >> > dentry not found in 63af10b7-9dac-4a53-aab1-3cc17fff3255
> >> >>> >> > [2016-12-06 15:17:43.311400] E
> >> >>> >> > [shard.c:460:__shard_update_shards_inode_list]
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > (-->/usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(
> shard_common_lookup_shards_cbk+0x2d)
> >> >>> >> > [0x7f5575680fdd]
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > -->/usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(
> shard_link_block_inode+0xdf)
> >> >>> >> > [0x7f5575680f6f]
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > -->/usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(__
> shard_update_shards_inode_list+0x22e)
> >> >>> >> > [0x7f557567c1ce] ) 0-: Assertion failed:
> lru_inode_ctx->block_num
> >> >>> >> > > 0
> >> >>> >> > [2016-12-06 15:17:43.311472] W [inode.c:1232:inode_unlink]
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > (-->/usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(
> shard_link_block_inode+0xdf)
> >> >>> >> > [0x7f5575680f6f]
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > -->/usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(__
> shard_update_shards_inode_list+0x14a)
> >> >>> >> > [0x7f557567c0ea] -->/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0(
> inode_unlink+0x9c)
> >> >>> >> > [0x7f558386ba0c] ) 0-testSF-HDD-shard: inode not found
> >> >>> >> > [2016-12-06 15:17:43.333456] W [inode.c:1133:inode_forget]
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > (-->/usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(
> shard_link_block_inode+0xdf)
> >> >>> >> > [0x7f5575680f6f]
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > -->/usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(__
> shard_update_shards_inode_list+0x154)
> >> >>> >> > [0x7f557567c0f4] -->/lib64/libglusterfs.so.0(
> inode_forget+0x90)
> >> >>> >> > [0x7f558386b800] ) 0-testSF-HDD-shard: inode not found
> >> >>> >> > [2016-12-06 15:18:47.129794] W
> >> >>> >> > [fuse-bridge.c:2311:fuse_writev_cbk]
> >> >>> >> > 0-glusterfs-fuse: 12555429: WRITE => -1
> >> >>> >> > gfid=864c9ea1-3a7e-4d41-899b-f30604a7584e fd=0x7f557016ae6c
> >> >>> >> > (Invalid
> >> >>> >> > argument)
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > Below is the code and it will go to the else block when
> >> >>> >> > inode_count
> >> >>> >> > is
> >> >>> >> > greater than SHARD_MAX_INODES which is 16384. And my dataset of
> >> >>> >> > 400GB
> >> >>> >> > with 16MB shard size has enough shard file (400GB/16MB) to
> >> >>> >> > achieve
> >> >>> >> > it.
> >> >>> >> > When i do the test with smaller dataset, there is no such
> error.
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > shard.c
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > if (priv->inode_count + 1 <= SHARD_MAX_INODES)
> {
> >> >>> >> > /* If this inode was linked here for the first
> >> >>> >> > time
> >> >>> >> > (indicated
> >> >>> >> > * by empty list), and if there is still space
> in
> >> >>> >> > the
> >> >>> >> > priv list,
> >> >>> >> > * add this ctx to the tail of the list.
> >> >>> >> > */
> >> >>> >> > gf_uuid_copy (ctx->base_gfid,
> >> >>> >> > base_inode->gfid);
> >> >>> >> > ctx->block_num = block_num;
> >> >>> >> > list_add_tail (&ctx->ilist,
> >> >>> >> > &priv->ilist_head);
> >> >>> >> > priv->inode_count++;
> >> >>> >> > } else {
> >> >>> >> > /*If on the other hand there is no available
> slot
> >> >>> >> > for
> >> >>> >> > this inode
> >> >>> >> > * in the list, delete the lru inode from the
> >> >>> >> > head of
> >> >>> >> > the list,
> >> >>> >> > * unlink it. And in its place add this new
> inode
> >> >>> >> > into
> >> >>> >> > the list.
> >> >>> >> > */
> >> >>> >> > lru_inode_ctx = list_first_entry
> >> >>> >> > (&priv->ilist_head,
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > shard_inode_ctx_t,
> >> >>> >> >
> ilist);
> >> >>> >> > /* add in message for debug*/
> >> >>> >> > gf_msg (THIS->name, GF_LOG_WARNING, 0,
> >> >>> >> > SHARD_MSG_INVALID_FOP,
> >> >>> >> > "block number = %d",
> >> >>> >> > lru_inode_ctx->block_num);
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > GF_ASSERT (lru_inode_ctx->block_num >
> 0);
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > Hopefully can get some advice from you guys on this. Thanks.
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > Cw
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 9:07 AM, qingwei wei <
> tchengwee at gmail.com>
> >> >>> >> > wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> Hi,
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> This is the repost of my email in the gluster-user mailing
> list.
> >> >>> >> >> Appreciate if anyone has any idea on the issue i have now.
> >> >>> >> >> Thanks.
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> I encountered this when i do the FIO random write on the fuse
> >> >>> >> >> mount
> >> >>> >> >> gluster volume. After this assertion happen, the client log is
> >> >>> >> >> filled
> >> >>> >> >> with pending frames messages and FIO just show zero IO in the
> >> >>> >> >> progress
> >> >>> >> >> status. As i leave this test to run overnight, the client log
> >> >>> >> >> file
> >> >>> >> >> fill up with those pending frame messages and hit 28GB for
> >> >>> >> >> around 12
> >> >>> >> >> hours.
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> The client log:
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> [2016-12-04 15:48:35.274208] W [MSGID: 109072]
> >> >>> >> >> [dht-linkfile.c:50:dht_linkfile_lookup_cbk] 0-testSF-dht: got
> >> >>> >> >> non-linkfile
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> testSF-replicate-0:/.shard/21da7b64-45e5-4c6a-9244-
> 53d0284bf7ed.7038,
> >> >>> >> >> gfid = 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
> >> >>> >> >> [2016-12-04 15:48:35.277208] W [MSGID: 109072]
> >> >>> >> >> [dht-linkfile.c:50:dht_linkfile_lookup_cbk] 0-testSF-dht: got
> >> >>> >> >> non-linkfile
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> testSF-replicate-0:/.shard/21da7b64-45e5-4c6a-9244-
> 53d0284bf7ed.8957,
> >> >>> >> >> gfid = 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
> >> >>> >> >> [2016-12-04 15:48:35.277588] W [MSGID: 109072]
> >> >>> >> >> [dht-linkfile.c:50:dht_linkfile_lookup_cbk] 0-testSF-dht: got
> >> >>> >> >> non-linkfile
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> testSF-replicate-0:/.shard/21da7b64-45e5-4c6a-9244-
> 53d0284bf7ed.11912,
> >> >>> >> >> gfid = 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
> >> >>> >> >> [2016-12-04 15:48:35.312751] E
> >> >>> >> >> [shard.c:460:__shard_update_shards_inode_list]
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> (-->/usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(
> shard_common_lookup_shards_cbk+0x2d)
> >> >>> >> >> [0x7f86cc42efdd]
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> -->/usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(
> shard_link_block_inode+0xdf)
> >> >>> >> >> [0x7f86cc42ef6f]
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> -->/usr/lib64/glusterfs/3.7.17/xlator/features/shard.so(__
> shard_update_shards_inode_list+0x22e)
> >> >>> >> >> [0x7f86cc42a1ce] ) 0-: Assertion failed:
> >> >>> >> >> lru_inode_ctx->block_num >
> >> >>> >> >> 0
> >> >>> >> >> pending frames:
> >> >>> >> >> frame : type(0) op(0)
> >> >>> >> >> frame : type(0) op(0)
> >> >>> >> >> frame : type(0) op(0)
> >> >>> >> >> frame : type(0) op(0)
> >> >>> >> >> frame : type(0) op(0)
> >> >>> >> >> frame : type(0) op(0)
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> Gluster info (i am testing this on one server with each disk
> >> >>> >> >> representing one brick, this gluster volume is then mounted
> >> >>> >> >> locally
> >> >>> >> >> via fuse)
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> Volume Name: testSF
> >> >>> >> >> Type: Distributed-Replicate
> >> >>> >> >> Volume ID: 3f205363-5029-40d7-b1b5-216f9639b454
> >> >>> >> >> Status: Started
> >> >>> >> >> Number of Bricks: 2 x 3 = 6
> >> >>> >> >> Transport-type: tcp
> >> >>> >> >> Bricks:
> >> >>> >> >> Brick1: 192.168.123.4:/mnt/sdb_mssd/testSF
> >> >>> >> >> Brick2: 192.168.123.4:/mnt/sdc_mssd/testSF
> >> >>> >> >> Brick3: 192.168.123.4:/mnt/sdd_mssd/testSF
> >> >>> >> >> Brick4: 192.168.123.4:/mnt/sde_mssd/testSF
> >> >>> >> >> Brick5: 192.168.123.4:/mnt/sdf_mssd/testSF
> >> >>> >> >> Brick6: 192.168.123.4:/mnt/sdg_mssd/testSF
> >> >>> >> >> Options Reconfigured:
> >> >>> >> >> features.shard-block-size: 16MB
> >> >>> >> >> features.shard: on
> >> >>> >> >> performance.readdir-ahead: on
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> Gluster version: 3.7.17
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> The actual disk usage (Is about 91% full):
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> /dev/sdb1 235G 202G 22G 91% /mnt/sdb_mssd
> >> >>> >> >> /dev/sdc1 235G 202G 22G 91% /mnt/sdc_mssd
> >> >>> >> >> /dev/sdd1 235G 202G 22G 91% /mnt/sdd_mssd
> >> >>> >> >> /dev/sde1 235G 200G 23G 90% /mnt/sde_mssd
> >> >>> >> >> /dev/sdf1 235G 200G 23G 90% /mnt/sdf_mssd
> >> >>> >> >> /dev/sdg1 235G 200G 23G 90% /mnt/sdg_mssd
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> Anyone encounter this issue before?
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> Cw
> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> >> Gluster-devel mailing list
> >> >>> >> Gluster-devel at gluster.org
> >> >>> >> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20161221/3a40d0dd/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Gluster-devel
mailing list