[Gluster-users] AFR dates problem

[Krishna Srinivas]

On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 1:07 PM, Keith Freedman <freedman at freeformit.com> wrote:
> At 11:00 PM 12/29/2008, Krishna Srinivas wrote:
>>
>> Keith,
>>
>> It was fixed in the sense, AFR will return stat of the same subvol
>> everytime, before it used to return stat from one of the subvols. But
>> still if the subvol-server clock is different than that of client, the
>> time stamp will be of the server and not client.
>
> so, in the case where they both differ, how will we know which time will be
> associated with a file?

The first subvol mentioned in the list is considered, if it is down,
then the next is considered.

> and will it fix the on-disk stamp or just ignore it provided the other
> subvol is online?

It will not fix the time stamp if they differ.

>
> ideally, it will pick one, and make sure all the others are 'reset' to that
> so that if the preferred vol goes offline, timestamps don't suddenly get
> weird.

True, but ideally all servers and clients should be time synced using
ntp. For example if clients
are not in sync, one of them might see time stamp of the future.

>
> as for the server times differing.  I suppose it's possible, if so it's by
> microseconds as they're both synced hourly to the universal clock via ntpd.
>
>
>> Krishna
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:22 PM, Krishna Srinivas
>> <krishna at zresearch.com> wrote:
>> > Keith,
>> > It was fixed in patch-804.
>> > Krishna
>> >
>> > On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 6:07 AM, Keith Freedman
>> > <freedman at freeformit.com> wrote:
>> >> I have a problem with file mod times using AFR.
>> >>
>> >> this is really bad:
>> >> server1# ls -al vfc017.jpg
>> >> -rw-r--r-- 1 user1 group1 47660 2008-07-10 14:06 vfc017.jpg
>> >> server1# ls -alu vfc017.jpg
>> >> -rw-r--r-- 1 user1 group1 47660 2008-07-10 14:06 vfc017.jpg
>> >>
>> >> server2# ls -al vfc017.jpg
>> >> -rw-r--r-- 1 user1 group1 47660 2008-12-23 09:25 vfc017.jpg
>> >> server2# ls -alu vfc017.jpg
>> >> -rw-r--r-- 1 user1 group1 47660 2008-12-29 15:55 vfc017.jpg
>> >>
>> >> so, there are programs and such which look for files modified after a
>> >> certain date, and does stuff to them.
>> >> if this is a web app, for example, and it hits the server with the
>> >> newer date (the date AFR copied the file I presume?) then it thinks
>> >> every single thing is new and does it's processing.
>> >>
>> >> Shouldn't AFR set the file mod and create times to that of the
>> >> original source file?
>> >>
>> >> However, once it's in this state, I'm not sure how to fix it in an
>> >> automated way, but hopefully there will be a patch so that this
>> >> doesn't happen in the future.
>> >>
>> >> Keith
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Gluster-users mailing list
>> >> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>> >> http://zresearch.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>> >>
>> >
>
>