[Gluster-users] backupvolfile-server fqdn vs short

Alastair Neil ajneil.tech at gmail.com
Thu Jul 23 20:26:43 UTC 2015

yes certain - the mount command is in the fstab and it uses all fully
qualified domain names.
btw Atin, gmail showed me an empy reply - had to use view original to see
your question, not sure why, are you sending plaintext?

gluster0.vsnet.gmu.edu:/digitalcorpora /var/www/digitalcorpora glusterfs
> _netdev,use-readdirp=no,backupvolfile-server=gluster1.vsnet.gmu.edu:g
> luster-2.vsnet.gmu.edu 0 0

On 23 July 2015 at 12:30, Atin Mukherjee <atin.mukherjee83 at gmail.com> wrote:

> -Atin
> Sent from one plus one
> On Jul 23, 2015 9:07 PM, "Alastair Neil" <ajneil.tech at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I just had a curious failure.  I have a gluster 3.6.3 replica 3 volume
> which was mounted via an 3.6.3 client  from one of the nodes with the other
> two specified in the backupvolfile-server mount option.  In the fstab entry
> all the nodes are referenced by their fully qualified domain names.
> >
> > When I rebooted the primary node, the mount became detached because the
> client was trying to use the short name to communicate with the backup
> nodes and failing to resolve it.  This was fixed by adding the domain to
> the search in resolv.conf.  However I am curious as to why it should try
> and use the short name instead of the fqdn specified in the fstab entry?
> The nodes all have peer entries for hostname, ip address and fqdn.
> Are you sure you didn't use short name in your mount command?
> >
> > Thanks,  Alastair
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Gluster-users mailing list
> > Gluster-users at gluster.org
> > http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20150723/3458eb0f/attachment.html>

More information about the Gluster-users mailing list