[Gluster-users] AFR dates problem

[Keith Freedman]

At 09:39 PM 12/30/2008, Raghavendra G wrote:


>On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 12:29 PM, Keith Freedman 
><<mailto:freedman at freeformit.com>freedman at freeformit.com> wrote:
>
> > > 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.
>
>ok, so I made sure that my subvolume list on the servers is in the same order.
>I had always listed the local volume first and the remote one second,
>but it sounds like this would lead to each node using it's own
>timestamps or do all the servers in the AFR elect a preferred 'first' subvol?
>
> > > 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.
>
>how about new files being replicated..  they'll get the timestamp of
>the server from which the source file is available?
>
>in other words.. if I add a new empty volume, and AFR copies
>everything to it... what dates will be on the local files?
>
>
>During self-heal afr sets the timestamps (atime and mtime) to that 
>of the file on the source node.

this works fine.

to solve my problem, I created a script which gets the file times for 
each file and creates a set of "touch -d " commands to set the dates 
on the other server.
that was preferable to deleting the directory tree and having things 
auto-healed since it's roughly 12 GB's

And, it seems it's not something that would be a problem in the future.

Keith