[Gluster-users] Issue when upgrading from 3.6 to 3.7

[B.K.Raghuram]

Hi Manikandan,

Did you have a chance to look at the glusterd config files? We've tried a
couple of times to upgrade from 3.6.1 and the vol info files never seems to
get a quota-version flag in it.. One of our installations is stuck at the
old version because of potential upgrade issues to 3.7.13.

Thanks,
-Ram

On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 6:40 PM, Manikandan Selvaganesh <mselvaga at redhat.com
> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> It would work fine with the upgraded setup on a fresh install. And yes, if
> quota-version is not present it would cause malfunctioning such as checksum
> issue, peer rejection and quota would not work properly. This quota-version
> is introduced recently which adds suffix to the quota related extended
> attributes.
>
> On Jul 25, 2016 6:36 PM, "B.K.Raghuram" <bkrram at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Manikandan,
>>
>> We just overwrote the setup with a fresh install and there I see the
>> quota-version in the volume info file. For the upgraded setup, I only have
>> the /var/lib/glusterd, which I'm attaching. Once we recreate this, I'll
>> send you the rest of the info.
>>
>> However, is there an issue if the quota-version is not being in the info
>> file? Will it cause the quota functionality to malfunction?
>>
>> On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 5:41 PM, Manikandan Selvaganesh <
>> mselvaga at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Could you please attach the vol files, log files and the output of
>>> gluster v info?
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 5:35 PM, Atin Mukherjee <amukherj at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 4:37 PM, B.K.Raghuram <bkrram at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Atin,
>>>>>
>>>>> Couple of quick questions about the upgrade and in general about the
>>>>> meaning of some of the parameters in the glusterd dir..
>>>>>
>>>>> - I dont see the quota-version in the volume info file post upgrade,
>>>>> so did the upgrade not go through properly?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you are seeing a check sum issue you'd need to copy the same volume
>>>> info file to that node where the checksum went wrong and then restart
>>>> glusterd service.
>>>> And yes, this looks like a bug in quota. @Mani - time to chip in :)
>>>>
>>>> - What does the op-version in the volume info file mean? Does this have
>>>>> any corelation with the cluster op-version? Does it change with an upgrade?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> volume's op-version is different. This is basically used in checking
>>>> client's compatibility and it shouldn't change with an upgrade AFAIK and
>>>> remember from the code.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> - A more basic question - should all peer probes always be done from
>>>>> the same node or can they be done from any node that is already in the
>>>>> cluster? The reason I ask is when I tried to do what was said in
>>>>> http://gluster-documentations.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Administrator%20Guide/Resolving%20Peer%20Rejected/
>>>>> the initial cluster was initiated from node A with 5 other peers. Then post
>>>>> upgrade, node B which was in the cluster got a peer rejected. So I deleted
>>>>> all the files except glusterd.info and then did a peer probe of A
>>>>> from B. Then when I ran a peer status on A, it only showed one node, B.
>>>>> Should I have probed B from A instead?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  peer probe can be done from any node in the trusted storage pool. So
>>>> that's really not the issue. Ensure you keep all your peer file contents
>>>> through out the same (/var/lib/glusterd/peers) where as only self uuid
>>>> differs and then restarting glusterd service should solve the problem.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Atin Mukherjee <amukherj at redhat.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I am suspecting it to be new quota-version introduced in the volume
>>>>>> info file which may have resulted in a checksum mismatch resulting into
>>>>>> peer rejection. But we can confirm it from log files and respective info
>>>>>> file content.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Saturday 23 July 2016, B.K.Raghuram <bkrram at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unfortunately, the setup is at a customer's place which is not
>>>>>>> remotely accessible. Will try and get it by early next week. But could it
>>>>>>> just be a mismatch of the /var/lib/glusterd files?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 8:07 PM, Atin Mukherjee <amukherj at redhat.com
>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Glusterd logs from all the nodes please?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Friday 22 July 2016, B.K.Raghuram <bkrram at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> When we upgrade some nodes from 3.6.1 to 3.7.13, some of the nodes
>>>>>>>>> give a peer status of "peer rejected" while some dont. Is there a reason
>>>>>>>>> for this discrepency and will the steps mentioned in
>>>>>>>>> http://gluster-documentations.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Administrator%20Guide/Resolving%20Peer%20Rejected/
>>>>>>>>> work for this as well?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Just out of curiosity, why the line "Try the whole procedure a
>>>>>>>>> couple more times if it doesn't work right away." in the link above?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Atin
>>>>>>>> Sent from iPhone
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Atin
>>>>>> Sent from iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> --Atin
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>>> http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Manikandan Selvaganesh.
>>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20160727/c11f2369/attachment.html>