[Gluster-users] Issue when upgrading from 3.6 to 3.7

[Manikandan Selvaganesh]

Hi,

It would work fine with the upgraded setup on a fresh install. And yes, if
quota-version is not present it would cause malfunctioning such as checksum
issue, peer rejection and quota would not work properly. This quota-version
is introduced recently which adds suffix to the quota related extended
attributes.

On Jul 25, 2016 6:36 PM, "B.K.Raghuram" <bkrram at gmail.com> wrote:

> Manikandan,
>
> We just overwrote the setup with a fresh install and there I see the
> quota-version in the volume info file. For the upgraded setup, I only have
> the /var/lib/glusterd, which I'm attaching. Once we recreate this, I'll
> send you the rest of the info.
>
> However, is there an issue if the quota-version is not being in the info
> file? Will it cause the quota functionality to malfunction?
>
> On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 5:41 PM, Manikandan Selvaganesh <
> mselvaga at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Could you please attach the vol files, log files and the output of
>> gluster v info?
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 5:35 PM, Atin Mukherjee <amukherj at redhat.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 4:37 PM, B.K.Raghuram <bkrram at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Atin,
>>>>
>>>> Couple of quick questions about the upgrade and in general about the
>>>> meaning of some of the parameters in the glusterd dir..
>>>>
>>>> - I dont see the quota-version in the volume info file post upgrade, so
>>>> did the upgrade not go through properly?
>>>>
>>>
>>> If you are seeing a check sum issue you'd need to copy the same volume
>>> info file to that node where the checksum went wrong and then restart
>>> glusterd service.
>>> And yes, this looks like a bug in quota. @Mani - time to chip in :)
>>>
>>> - What does the op-version in the volume info file mean? Does this have
>>>> any corelation with the cluster op-version? Does it change with an upgrade?
>>>>
>>>
>>> volume's op-version is different. This is basically used in checking
>>> client's compatibility and it shouldn't change with an upgrade AFAIK and
>>> remember from the code.
>>>
>>>
>>>> - A more basic question - should all peer probes always be done from
>>>> the same node or can they be done from any node that is already in the
>>>> cluster? The reason I ask is when I tried to do what was said in
>>>> http://gluster-documentations.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Administrator%20Guide/Resolving%20Peer%20Rejected/
>>>> the initial cluster was initiated from node A with 5 other peers. Then post
>>>> upgrade, node B which was in the cluster got a peer rejected. So I deleted
>>>> all the files except glusterd.info and then did a peer probe of A from
>>>> B. Then when I ran a peer status on A, it only showed one node, B. Should I
>>>> have probed B from A instead?
>>>>
>>>
>>>  peer probe can be done from any node in the trusted storage pool. So
>>> that's really not the issue. Ensure you keep all your peer file contents
>>> through out the same (/var/lib/glusterd/peers) where as only self uuid
>>> differs and then restarting glusterd service should solve the problem.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Atin Mukherjee <amukherj at redhat.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I am suspecting it to be new quota-version introduced in the volume
>>>>> info file which may have resulted in a checksum mismatch resulting into
>>>>> peer rejection. But we can confirm it from log files and respective info
>>>>> file content.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Saturday 23 July 2016, B.K.Raghuram <bkrram at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Unfortunately, the setup is at a customer's place which is not
>>>>>> remotely accessible. Will try and get it by early next week. But could it
>>>>>> just be a mismatch of the /var/lib/glusterd files?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Atin Mukherjee <amukherj at redhat.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Glusterd logs from all the nodes please?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Friday 22 July 2016, B.K.Raghuram <bkrram at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> When we upgrade some nodes from 3.6.1 to 3.7.13, some of the nodes
>>>>>>>> give a peer status of "peer rejected" while some dont. Is there a reason
>>>>>>>> for this discrepency and will the steps mentioned in
>>>>>>>> http://gluster-documentations.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Administrator%20Guide/Resolving%20Peer%20Rejected/
>>>>>>>> work for this as well?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just out of curiosity, why the line "Try the whole procedure a
>>>>>>>> couple more times if it doesn't work right away." in the link above?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Atin
>>>>>>> Sent from iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Atin
>>>>> Sent from iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> --Atin
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Manikandan Selvaganesh.
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20160725/7c15e31d/attachment.html>