[Gluster-users] strange behavior with glusterfs 3.2.0

[Christopher Anderlik]

Hi Mohammed,

thank you very much for your answer.

The volfile was generated in 3.1.x - we only upgraded server and client but did not generate new 
volfiles.


I now generated a new volfile and it looks like this:



volume macm03-posix
     type storage/posix
     option directory /glusterstorage/macm03
end-volume

volume macm03-access-control
     type features/access-control
     subvolumes macm03-posix
end-volume

volume macm03-locks
     type features/locks
     subvolumes macm03-access-control
end-volume

volume macm03-io-threads
     type performance/io-threads
     subvolumes macm03-locks
end-volume

volume macm03-marker
     type features/marker
     option volume-uuid d6af5997-f242-4077-a366-edf2d6e9ba0a
     option timestamp-file /etc/glusterd/vols/macm03/marker.tstamp
     option xtime off
     option quota off
     subvolumes macm03-io-threads
end-volume

volume /glusterstorage/macm03
     type debug/io-stats
     option latency-measurement off
     option count-fop-hits off
     subvolumes macm03-marker
end-volume

volume macm03-server
     type protocol/server
     option transport-type tcp
     option auth.addr./glusterstorage/macm03.allow *
     subvolumes /glusterstorage/macm03
end-volume




as far as I see there is now a "new" volume "marker".

I will test again.


thank you very much!

christopher















Am 02.05.2011 19:42, schrieb Mohammed Junaid Ahmed:
> Hi Christopher,
>
> I see that that the server side volfile has a translator missing. How did you generate the volfile?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Christopher Anderlik"<christopher.anderlik at xidras.com>
>> To: gluster-users at gluster.org
>> Sent: Monday, May 2, 2011 7:09:47 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] strange behavior with glusterfs 3.2.0
>> hello again.
>>
>> I realized that all these problems occurs if there is a 0-size-file on
>> one of the 2 gfs-server
>> (replicated).
>>
>> so, when or how do these 0-size-files occur?
>>
>> only a webserver (apache) access these files. I can't believe, that
>> the webserver is the reason for
>> these 0-size-files.
>>
>> thx
>> christopher
>>