[Gluster-users] peer rejected but connected

[Gaurav Yadav]

Logs from newly added node helped me in RCA of the issue.

Info file on node 10.5.6.17 consist of an additional property
"tier-enabled" which is not present in info file from other 3 nodes, hence
when gluster peer probe call is made, in order to maintain consistency
across the cluster cksum is compared. In this
case as both files are different leading to different cksum, causing state
in  "State: Peer Rejected (Connected)".

This inconsistency arise due to upgrade you did.

Workaround:
1.Go to node 10.5.6.17
2.Open info file from "/var/lib/glusterd/vols/<vol-name>/info" and remove
"tier-enabled=0".
3.Restart glusterd services
4.Peer probe again.

Thanks
Gaurav

On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 3:37 PM, lejeczek <peljasz at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> attached the lot as per your request.
>
> Would bee really great if you can find the root cause of this and suggest
> a resolution. Fingers crossed.
> thanks, L.
>
> On 31/08/17 05:34, Gaurav Yadav wrote:
>
>> Could you please sendentire content of "/var/lib/glusterd/" directory of
>> the 4th node which is being peer probed, along with command-history and
>> glusterd.logs.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Gaurav
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 7:10 PM, lejeczek <peljasz at yahoo.co.uk <mailto:
>> peljasz at yahoo.co.uk>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>     On 30/08/17 07:18, Gaurav Yadav wrote:
>>
>>
>>         Could you please send me "info" file which is
>>         placed in "/var/lib/glusterd/vols/<vol-name>"
>>         directory from all the nodes along with
>>         glusterd.logs and command-history.
>>
>>         Thanks
>>         Gaurav
>>
>>         On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 7:13 PM, lejeczek
>>         <peljasz at yahoo.co.uk <mailto:peljasz at yahoo.co.uk>
>>         <mailto:peljasz at yahoo.co.uk
>>
>>         <mailto:peljasz at yahoo.co.uk>>> wrote:
>>
>>             hi fellas,
>>             same old same
>>             in log of the probing peer I see:
>>             ...
>>             2017-08-29 13:36:16.882196] I [MSGID: 106493]
>>
>>         [glusterd-handler.c:3020:__glusterd_handle_probe_query]
>>             0-glusterd: Responded to priv.xx.xx.priv.xx.xx.x,
>>             op_ret: 0, op_errno: 0, ret: 0
>>             [2017-08-29 13:36:16.904961] I [MSGID: 106490]
>>
>>         [glusterd-handler.c:2606:__glusterd_handle_incoming_friend_req]
>>             0-glusterd: Received probe from uuid:
>>             2a17edb4-ae68-4b67-916e-e38a2087ca28
>>             [2017-08-29 13:36:16.906477] E [MSGID: 106010]
>>
>>         [glusterd-utils.c:3034:glusterd_compare_friend_volume]
>>             0-management: Version of Cksums CO-DATA
>>         differ. local
>>             cksum = 4088157353, remote cksum = 2870780063
>>         on peer
>>             10.5.6.17
>>             [2017-08-29 13:36:16.907187] I [MSGID: 106493]
>>
>>         [glusterd-handler.c:3866:glusterd_xfer_friend_add_resp]
>>             0-glusterd: Responded to 10.5.6.17 (0), ret:
>>         0, op_ret: -1
>>             ...
>>
>>             Why would adding a new peer make cluster jump
>>         to check
>>             checksums on a vol on that newly added peer?
>>
>>
>>     really. I mean, no brick even exists on newly added
>>     peer, it's just been probed, why this?:
>>
>>     [2017-08-30 13:17:51.949430] E [MSGID: 106010]
>>     [glusterd-utils.c:3034:glusterd_compare_friend_volume]
>>     0-management: Version of Cksums CO-DATA differ. local
>>     cksum = 4088157353, remote cksum = 2870780063 on peer
>>     10.5.6.17
>>
>>     10.5.6.17 is a candidate I'm probing from a working
>>     cluster.
>>     Why gluster wants checksums and why checksums would be
>>     different?
>>     Would anybody know what is going on there?
>>
>>
>>             Is it why the peer gets rejected?
>>             That peer I'm hoping to add, was a member of the
>>             cluster in the past but I did "usual" wipe of
>>             /var/lib/gluster on candidate peer.
>>
>>             a hint, solution would be great to hear.
>>             L.
>>             _______________________________________________
>>             Gluster-users mailing list
>>         Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>         <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org>
>>             <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>         <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org>>
>>         http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>         <http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users>
>>
>>         <http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>         <http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Gluster-users mailing list
>>     Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>     <mailto:Gluster-users at gluster.org>
>>     http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>     <http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users>
>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20170901/885c47f7/attachment.html>