[Gluster-devel] Bitrot stub forget()

FNU Raghavendra Manjunath rabhat at redhat.com
Wed Feb 17 04:38:24 UTC 2016


Yes. You are right. We should not remove the quarantine entry in forget.

We have to remove it upon getting -ve lookups in bit-rot-stub and upon
getting an unlink.

I have attached a patch for it.

Unfortunately rfc.sh is failing for me with the below error.

ssh: connect to host git.gluster.com port 22: Connection timed out
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.

Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists."


On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Venky Shankar <vshankar at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hey Raghu,
> Bitrot stub inode forget implementation (br_stub_forget()) deletes the bad
> object
> marker (under quarantine directory) if present. This looks incorrect as
> ->forget()
> can be trigerred when inode table LRU size exceeeds configured limit -
> check bug
> #1308961 which tracks this issue. I recall that protocol/server calls
> inode_forget()
> on negative lookup (that might not invoke ->forget() though) and that's
> the reason
> why br_stub_forget() has this code.
> So, would it make sense to purge bad object marker just in lookup()? There
> might be
> a need to do the same in unlink() in case the object was removed by the
> client.
> Thoughts?
> Thanks,
>                 Venky
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20160216/d15ae934/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-features-bitrot-do-not-remove-the-quarantine-handle-.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 6182 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/attachments/20160216/d15ae934/attachment-0001.bin>

More information about the Gluster-devel mailing list