[Gluster-users] Upgrade 5.3 -> 5.4 on debian: public IP is used instead of LAN IP

Artem Russakovskii archon810 at gmail.com
Tue Mar 5 19:09:10 UTC 2019 

Ended up downgrading to 5.3 just in case. Peer status and volume status are
OK now.

zypper install --oldpackage glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1
Loading repository data...
Reading installed packages...
Resolving package dependencies...

Problem: glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 requires libgfapi0 = 5.3, but
this requirement cannot be provided
  not installable providers: libgfapi0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64[glusterfs]
 Solution 1: Following actions will be done:
  downgrade of libgfapi0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to
libgfapi0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64
  downgrade of libgfchangelog0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to
libgfchangelog0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64
  downgrade of libgfrpc0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to
libgfrpc0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64
  downgrade of libgfxdr0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to
libgfxdr0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64
  downgrade of libglusterfs0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to
libglusterfs0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64
 Solution 2: do not install glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64
 Solution 3: break glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 by ignoring some of its
dependencies

Choose from above solutions by number or cancel [1/2/3/c] (c): 1
Resolving dependencies...
Resolving package dependencies...

The following 6 packages are going to be downgraded:
  glusterfs libgfapi0 libgfchangelog0 libgfrpc0 libgfxdr0 libglusterfs0

6 packages to downgrade.

Sincerely,
Artem

--
Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror
<http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC
beerpla.net | +ArtemRussakovskii
<https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR
<http://twitter.com/ArtemR>


On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 10:57 AM Artem Russakovskii <archon810 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Noticed the same when upgrading from 5.3 to 5.4, as mentioned.
>
> I'm confused though. Is actual replication affected, because the 5.4
> server and the 3x 5.3 servers still show heal info as all 4 connected, and
> the files seem to be replicating correctly as well.
>
> So what's actually affected - just the status command, or leaving 5.4 on
> one of the nodes is doing some damage to the underlying fs? Is it fixable
> by tweaking transport.socket.ssl-enabled? Does upgrading all servers to 5.4
> resolve it, or should we revert back to 5.3?
>
> Sincerely,
> Artem
>
> --
> Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror
> <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC
> beerpla.net | +ArtemRussakovskii
> <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR
> <http://twitter.com/ArtemR>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 2:02 AM Hu Bert <revirii at googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>> fyi: did a downgrade 5.4 -> 5.3 and it worked. all replicas are up and
>> running. Awaiting updated v5.4.
>>
>> thx :-)
>>
>> Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 09:26 Uhr schrieb Hari Gowtham <
>> hgowtham at redhat.com>:
>> >
>> > There are plans to revert the patch causing this error and rebuilt 5.4.
>> > This should happen faster. the rebuilt 5.4 should be void of this
>> upgrade issue.
>> >
>> > In the meantime, you can use 5.3 for this cluster.
>> > Downgrading to 5.3 will work if it was just one node that was upgrade
>> to 5.4
>> > and the other nodes are still in 5.3.
>> >
>> > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 1:07 PM Hu Bert <revirii at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hi Hari,
>> > >
>> > > thx for the hint. Do you know when this will be fixed? Is a downgrade
>> > > 5.4 -> 5.3 a possibility to fix this?
>> > >
>> > > Hubert
>> > >
>> > > Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 08:32 Uhr schrieb Hari Gowtham <
>> hgowtham at redhat.com>:
>> > > >
>> > > > Hi,
>> > > >
>> > > > This is a known issue we are working on.
>> > > > As the checksum differs between the updated and non updated node,
>> the
>> > > > peers are getting rejected.
>> > > > The bricks aren't coming because of the same issue.
>> > > >
>> > > > More about the issue:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685120
>> > > >
>> > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 12:56 PM Hu Bert <revirii at googlemail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Interestingly: gluster volume status misses gluster1, while heal
>> > > > > statistics show gluster1:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > gluster volume status workdata
>> > > > > Status of volume: workdata
>> > > > > Gluster process                             TCP Port  RDMA Port
>> Online  Pid
>> > > > >
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > > > Brick gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata        49153     0
>> Y       1723
>> > > > > Brick gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata        49153     0
>> Y       2068
>> > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost               N/A       N/A
>> Y       1732
>> > > > > Self-heal Daemon on gluster3                N/A       N/A
>> Y       2077
>> > > > >
>> > > > > vs.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > gluster volume heal workdata statistics heal-count
>> > > > > Gathering count of entries to be healed on volume workdata has
>> been successful
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Brick gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata
>> > > > > Number of entries: 0
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Brick gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata
>> > > > > Number of entries: 10745
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Brick gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata
>> > > > > Number of entries: 10744
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 08:18 Uhr schrieb Hu Bert <
>> revirii at googlemail.com>:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hi Miling,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > well, there are such entries, but those haven't been a problem
>> during
>> > > > > > install and the last kernel update+reboot. The entries look
>> like:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > PUBLIC_IP  gluster2.alpserver.de gluster2
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 192.168.0.50 gluster1
>> > > > > > 192.168.0.51 gluster2
>> > > > > > 192.168.0.52 gluster3
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 'ping gluster2' resolves to LAN IP; I removed the last entry in
>> the
>> > > > > > 1st line, did a reboot ... no, didn't help. From
>> > > > > > /var/log/glusterfs/glusterd.log
>> > > > > >  on gluster 2:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > [2019-03-05 07:04:36.188128] E [MSGID: 106010]
>> > > > > > [glusterd-utils.c:3483:glusterd_compare_friend_volume]
>> 0-management:
>> > > > > > Version of Cksums persistent differ. local cksum = 3950307018,
>> remote
>> > > > > > cksum = 455409345 on peer gluster1
>> > > > > > [2019-03-05 07:04:36.188314] I [MSGID: 106493]
>> > > > > > [glusterd-handler.c:3843:glusterd_xfer_friend_add_resp]
>> 0-glusterd:
>> > > > > > Responded to gluster1 (0), ret: 0, op_ret: -1
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Interestingly there are no entries in the brick logs of the
>> rejected
>> > > > > > server. Well, not surprising as no brick process is running. The
>> > > > > > server gluster1 is still in rejected state.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > 'gluster volume start workdata force' starts the brick process
>> on
>> > > > > > gluster1, and some heals are happening on gluster2+3, but via
>> 'gluster
>> > > > > > volume status workdata' the volumes still aren't complete.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > gluster1:
>> > > > > >
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > > > > Brick gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata        49152     0
>>   Y       2523
>> > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost               N/A       N/A
>>   Y       2549
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > gluster2:
>> > > > > > Gluster process                             TCP Port  RDMA
>> Port  Online  Pid
>> > > > > >
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > > > > Brick gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata        49153     0
>>   Y       1723
>> > > > > > Brick gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata        49153     0
>>   Y       2068
>> > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost               N/A       N/A
>>   Y       1732
>> > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on gluster3                N/A       N/A
>>   Y       2077
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hubert
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 07:58 Uhr schrieb Milind Changire <
>> mchangir at redhat.com>:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > There are probably DNS entries or /etc/hosts entries with the
>> public IP Addresses that the host names (gluster1, gluster2, gluster3) are
>> getting resolved to.
>> > > > > > > /etc/resolv.conf would tell which is the default domain
>> searched for the node names and the DNS servers which respond to the
>> queries.
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 12:14 PM Hu Bert <
>> revirii at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> Good morning,
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> i have a replicate 3 setup with 2 volumes, running on
>> version 5.3 on
>> > > > > > >> debian stretch. This morning i upgraded one server to
>> version 5.4 and
>> > > > > > >> rebooted the machine; after the restart i noticed that:
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> - no brick process is running
>> > > > > > >> - gluster volume status only shows the server itself:
>> > > > > > >> gluster volume status workdata
>> > > > > > >> Status of volume: workdata
>> > > > > > >> Gluster process                             TCP Port  RDMA
>> Port  Online  Pid
>> > > > > > >>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > > > > >> Brick gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata        N/A       N/A
>>     N       N/A
>> > > > > > >> NFS Server on localhost                     N/A       N/A
>>     N       N/A
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> - gluster peer status on the server
>> > > > > > >> gluster peer status
>> > > > > > >> Number of Peers: 2
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster3
>> > > > > > >> Uuid: c7b4a448-ca6a-4051-877f-788f9ee9bc4a
>> > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected (Connected)
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster2
>> > > > > > >> Uuid: 162fea82-406a-4f51-81a3-e90235d8da27
>> > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected (Connected)
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> - gluster peer status on the other 2 servers:
>> > > > > > >> gluster peer status
>> > > > > > >> Number of Peers: 2
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster1
>> > > > > > >> Uuid: 9a360776-7b58-49ae-831e-a0ce4e4afbef
>> > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected (Connected)
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster3
>> > > > > > >> Uuid: c7b4a448-ca6a-4051-877f-788f9ee9bc4a
>> > > > > > >> State: Peer in Cluster (Connected)
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> I noticed that, in the brick logs, i see that the public IP
>> is used
>> > > > > > >> instead of the LAN IP. brick logs from one of the volumes:
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> rejected node: https://pastebin.com/qkpj10Sd
>> > > > > > >> connected nodes: https://pastebin.com/8SxVVYFV
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> Why is the public IP suddenly used instead of the LAN IP?
>> Killing all
>> > > > > > >> gluster processes and rebooting (again) didn't help.
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > >> Thx,
>> > > > > > >> Hubert
>> > > > > > >> _______________________________________________
>> > > > > > >> Gluster-users mailing list
>> > > > > > >> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>> > > > > > >> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > Milind
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > _______________________________________________
>> > > > > Gluster-users mailing list
>> > > > > Gluster-users at gluster.org
>> > > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > --
>> > > > Regards,
>> > > > Hari Gowtham.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Regards,
>> > Hari Gowtham.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gluster-users mailing list
>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20190305/5e575562/attachment.html>

More information about the Gluster-users mailing list