[Gluster-users] Replace brick 3.4.2 with 3.6.2?
jgardeniers at objectmastery.com
Tue Feb 24 21:45:52 UTC 2015
Thanks for the reply but none of it answers my question. Nevertheless,
what's wrong with simply upgrading the nodes? Your suggested method
sounds extremely dangerous and not something I would ever contemplate
for a production system, even if we did have that kind of storage space
and nodes just lying around unused (we definitely do not). I also don't
understand what you mean by "While your volume size decreases on 3.4.0
cluster, you can unmount 3.4.0 members from cluster". Making a copy
doesn't alter the size of the original.
Please also note that I have already stated that we are locked in with
the client version and cannot upgrade them. That's controlled by Red
Hat, not us.
On 25/02/15 08:27, aytac zeren wrote:
> Hi John,
> 3.6.2 is a major release and introduces some new features in cluster
> wide concept. Additionally it is not stable yet. The best way of doing
> it would be establishing another 3.6.2 cluster, accessing 3.4.0
> cluster via nfs or native client, and copying content to 3.6.2 cluster
> gradually. While your volume size decreases on 3.4.0 cluster, you can
> unmount 3.4.0 members from cluster, upgrade them and add 3.6.2 trusted
> pool with brick. Please be careful while doing this operation, as
> number of nodes in your cluster should be reliable with your cluster
> design. (Stripped, Replicated, Distributed or a combination of them).
> Notice: I don't take any responsibility on the actions you have
> undertaken with regards to my recommendations, as my recommendations
> are general and does not take your archtiectural design into
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:19 PM, John Gardeniers
> <jgardeniers at objectmastery.com <mailto:jgardeniers at objectmastery.com>>
> Hi All,
> We have a gluster volume consisting of a single brick, using
> replica 2. Both nodes are currently running gluster 3.4.2 and I
> wish to replace one of the nodes with a new server (rigel), which
> has gluster 3.6.2
> Following this link:
> I tried to do a replace brick but got "volume replace-brick:
> failed: Host rigel is not in 'Peer in Cluster' state". Is this due
> to a version incompatibility or is it due to some other issue? A
> bit of googling reveals the error message in bug reports but I've
> not yet found anything that applies to this specific case.
> Incidentally, the clients (RHEV bare metal hypervisors, so we have
> no upgrade option) are running 3.4.0. Will this be a problem if
> the nodes are on 3.6.2?
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org>
> This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
> For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gluster-users