[Gluster-users] [Gluster-devel] Glusterfs meta data space consumption issue

[Atin Mukherjee]

On Mon, 17 Apr 2017 at 08:23, ABHISHEK PALIWAL <abhishpaliwal at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Here we have below steps to reproduce the issue
>
> Reproduction steps:
>
>
>
> root at 128:~# gluster volume create brick 128.224.95.140:/tmp/brick force
> ----- create the gluster volume
>
> volume create: brick: success: please start the volume to access data
>
> root at 128:~# gluster volume set brick nfs.disable true
>
> volume set: success
>
> root at 128:~# gluster volume start brick
>
> volume start: brick: success
>
> root at 128:~# gluster volume info
>
> Volume Name: brick
>
> Type: Distribute
>
> Volume ID: a59b479a-2b21-426d-962a-79d6d294fee3
>
> Status: Started
>
> Number of Bricks: 1
>
> Transport-type: tcp
>
> Bricks:
>
> Brick1: 128.224.95.140:/tmp/brick
>
> Options Reconfigured:
>
> nfs.disable: true
>
> performance.readdir-ahead: on
>
> root at 128:~# gluster volume status
>
> Status of volume: brick
>
> Gluster process TCP Port RDMA Port Online Pid
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
>
> Brick 128.224.95.140:/tmp/brick 49155 0 Y 768
>
>
>
> Task Status of Volume brick
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ------------------
>
> There are no active volume tasks
>
>
>
> root at 128:~# mount -t glusterfs 128.224.95.140:/brick gluster/
>
> root at 128:~# cd gluster/
>
> root at 128:~/gluster# du -sh
>
> 0 .
>
> root at 128:~/gluster# mkdir -p test/
>
> root at 128:~/gluster# cp ~/tmp.file gluster/
>
> root at 128:~/gluster# cp tmp.file test
>
> root at 128:~/gluster# cd /tmp/brick
>
> root at 128:/tmp/brick# du -sh *
>
> 768K test
>
> 768K tmp.file
>
> root at 128:/tmp/brick# rm -rf test --------- delete the test directory and
> data in the server side, not reasonable
>
> root at 128:/tmp/brick# ls
>
> tmp.file
>
> root at 128:/tmp/brick# du -sh *
>
> 768K tmp.file
>
> *root at 128:/tmp/brick# du -sh (brick dir)*
>
> *1.6M .*
>
> root at 128:/tmp/brick# cd .glusterfs/
>
> root at 128:/tmp/brick/.glusterfs# du -sh *
>
> 0 00
>
> 0 2a
>
> 0 bb
>
> 768K c8
>
> 0 c9
>
> 0 changelogs
>
> 768K d0
>
> 4.0K health_check
>
> 0 indices
>
> 0 landfill
>
> *root at 128:/tmp/brick/.glusterfs# du -sh (.glusterfs dir)*
>
> *1.6M .*
>
> root at 128:/tmp/brick# cd ~/gluster
>
> root at 128:~/gluster# ls
>
> tmp.file
>
> *root at 128:~/gluster# du -sh * (Mount dir)*
>
> *768K tmp.file*
>
>
>
> In the reproduce steps, we delete the test directory in the server side,
> not in the client side. I think this delete operation is not reasonable.
> Please ask the customer to check whether they do this unreasonable
> operation.
>

What's the need of deleting data from backend (i.e bricks) directly?


> *It seems while deleting the data from BRICK, metadata will not deleted
> from .glusterfs directory.*
>
>
> *I don't know whether it is a bug of limitations, please let us know about
> this?*
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Abhishek
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri <
> pkarampu at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 12:19 PM, ABHISHEK PALIWAL <
>> abhishpaliwal at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> yes it is ext4. but what is the impact of this.
>>>
>>
>> Did you have a lot of data before and you deleted all that data? ext4 if
>> I remember correctly doesn't decrease size of directory once it expands it.
>> So in ext4 inside a directory if you create lots and lots of files and
>> delete them all, the directory size would increase at the time of creation
>> but won't decrease after deletion. I don't have any system with ext4 at the
>> moment to test it now. This is something we faced 5-6 years back but not
>> sure if it is fixed in ext4 in the latest releases.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Pranith Kumar Karampuri <
>>> pkarampu at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Yes
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 8:21 AM, ABHISHEK PALIWAL <
>>>> abhishpaliwal at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Means the fs where this brick has been created?
>>>>> On Apr 13, 2017 8:19 AM, "Pranith Kumar Karampuri" <
>>>>> pkarampu at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Is your backend filesystem ext4?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 6:29 AM, ABHISHEK PALIWAL <
>>>>>> abhishpaliwal at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No,we are not using sharding
>>>>>>> On Apr 12, 2017 7:29 PM, "Alessandro Briosi" <ab1 at metalit.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Il 12/04/2017 14:16, ABHISHEK PALIWAL ha scritto:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have did more investigation and find out that brick dir size is
>>>>>>>> equivalent to gluster mount point but .glusterfs having too much difference
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You are probably using sharding?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Buon lavoro.
>>>>>>>> *Alessandro Briosi*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *METAL.it Nord S.r.l.*
>>>>>>>> Via Maioliche 57/C - 38068 Rovereto (TN)
>>>>>>>> Tel.+39.0464.430130 - Fax +39.0464.437393
>>>>>>>> www.metalit.com
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>>>>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Pranith
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Pranith
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Abhishek Paliwal
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Pranith
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
> Regards
> Abhishek Paliwal
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

-- 
- Atin (atinm)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170417/9e770d65/attachment.html>