[Gluster-users] Upgrade 5.3 -> 5.4 on debian: public IP is used instead of LAN IP
Artem Russakovskii
archon810 at gmail.com
Thu Mar 7 06:23:01 UTC 2019
Is the next release going to be an imminent hotfix, i.e. something like
today/tomorrow, or are we talking weeks?
Sincerely,
Artem
--
Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror
<http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC
beerpla.net | +ArtemRussakovskii
<https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR
<http://twitter.com/ArtemR>
On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 11:09 AM Artem Russakovskii <archon810 at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Ended up downgrading to 5.3 just in case. Peer status and volume status
> are OK now.
>
> zypper install --oldpackage glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1
> Loading repository data...
> Reading installed packages...
> Resolving package dependencies...
>
> Problem: glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 requires libgfapi0 = 5.3, but
> this requirement cannot be provided
> not installable providers: libgfapi0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64[glusterfs]
> Solution 1: Following actions will be done:
> downgrade of libgfapi0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to
> libgfapi0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64
> downgrade of libgfchangelog0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to
> libgfchangelog0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64
> downgrade of libgfrpc0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to
> libgfrpc0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64
> downgrade of libgfxdr0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to
> libgfxdr0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64
> downgrade of libglusterfs0-5.4-lp150.100.1.x86_64 to
> libglusterfs0-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64
> Solution 2: do not install glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64
> Solution 3: break glusterfs-5.3-lp150.100.1.x86_64 by ignoring some of
> its dependencies
>
> Choose from above solutions by number or cancel [1/2/3/c] (c): 1
> Resolving dependencies...
> Resolving package dependencies...
>
> The following 6 packages are going to be downgraded:
> glusterfs libgfapi0 libgfchangelog0 libgfrpc0 libgfxdr0 libglusterfs0
>
> 6 packages to downgrade.
>
> Sincerely,
> Artem
>
> --
> Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror
> <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC
> beerpla.net | +ArtemRussakovskii
> <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR
> <http://twitter.com/ArtemR>
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 10:57 AM Artem Russakovskii <archon810 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Noticed the same when upgrading from 5.3 to 5.4, as mentioned.
>>
>> I'm confused though. Is actual replication affected, because the 5.4
>> server and the 3x 5.3 servers still show heal info as all 4 connected, and
>> the files seem to be replicating correctly as well.
>>
>> So what's actually affected - just the status command, or leaving 5.4 on
>> one of the nodes is doing some damage to the underlying fs? Is it fixable
>> by tweaking transport.socket.ssl-enabled? Does upgrading all servers to 5.4
>> resolve it, or should we revert back to 5.3?
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Artem
>>
>> --
>> Founder, Android Police <http://www.androidpolice.com>, APK Mirror
>> <http://www.apkmirror.com/>, Illogical Robot LLC
>> beerpla.net | +ArtemRussakovskii
>> <https://plus.google.com/+ArtemRussakovskii> | @ArtemR
>> <http://twitter.com/ArtemR>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 2:02 AM Hu Bert <revirii at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> fyi: did a downgrade 5.4 -> 5.3 and it worked. all replicas are up and
>>> running. Awaiting updated v5.4.
>>>
>>> thx :-)
>>>
>>> Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 09:26 Uhr schrieb Hari Gowtham <
>>> hgowtham at redhat.com>:
>>> >
>>> > There are plans to revert the patch causing this error and rebuilt 5.4.
>>> > This should happen faster. the rebuilt 5.4 should be void of this
>>> upgrade issue.
>>> >
>>> > In the meantime, you can use 5.3 for this cluster.
>>> > Downgrading to 5.3 will work if it was just one node that was upgrade
>>> to 5.4
>>> > and the other nodes are still in 5.3.
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 1:07 PM Hu Bert <revirii at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > Hi Hari,
>>> > >
>>> > > thx for the hint. Do you know when this will be fixed? Is a downgrade
>>> > > 5.4 -> 5.3 a possibility to fix this?
>>> > >
>>> > > Hubert
>>> > >
>>> > > Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 08:32 Uhr schrieb Hari Gowtham <
>>> hgowtham at redhat.com>:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Hi,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > This is a known issue we are working on.
>>> > > > As the checksum differs between the updated and non updated node,
>>> the
>>> > > > peers are getting rejected.
>>> > > > The bricks aren't coming because of the same issue.
>>> > > >
>>> > > > More about the issue:
>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685120
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 12:56 PM Hu Bert <revirii at googlemail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > Interestingly: gluster volume status misses gluster1, while heal
>>> > > > > statistics show gluster1:
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > gluster volume status workdata
>>> > > > > Status of volume: workdata
>>> > > > > Gluster process TCP Port RDMA Port
>>> Online Pid
>>> > > > >
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > > > Brick gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata 49153 0
>>> Y 1723
>>> > > > > Brick gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata 49153 0
>>> Y 2068
>>> > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost N/A N/A
>>> Y 1732
>>> > > > > Self-heal Daemon on gluster3 N/A N/A
>>> Y 2077
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > vs.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > gluster volume heal workdata statistics heal-count
>>> > > > > Gathering count of entries to be healed on volume workdata has
>>> been successful
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > Brick gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata
>>> > > > > Number of entries: 0
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > Brick gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata
>>> > > > > Number of entries: 10745
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > Brick gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata
>>> > > > > Number of entries: 10744
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 08:18 Uhr schrieb Hu Bert <
>>> revirii at googlemail.com>:
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > Hi Miling,
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > well, there are such entries, but those haven't been a problem
>>> during
>>> > > > > > install and the last kernel update+reboot. The entries look
>>> like:
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > PUBLIC_IP gluster2.alpserver.de gluster2
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > 192.168.0.50 gluster1
>>> > > > > > 192.168.0.51 gluster2
>>> > > > > > 192.168.0.52 gluster3
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > 'ping gluster2' resolves to LAN IP; I removed the last entry
>>> in the
>>> > > > > > 1st line, did a reboot ... no, didn't help. From
>>> > > > > > /var/log/glusterfs/glusterd.log
>>> > > > > > on gluster 2:
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > [2019-03-05 07:04:36.188128] E [MSGID: 106010]
>>> > > > > > [glusterd-utils.c:3483:glusterd_compare_friend_volume]
>>> 0-management:
>>> > > > > > Version of Cksums persistent differ. local cksum = 3950307018,
>>> remote
>>> > > > > > cksum = 455409345 on peer gluster1
>>> > > > > > [2019-03-05 07:04:36.188314] I [MSGID: 106493]
>>> > > > > > [glusterd-handler.c:3843:glusterd_xfer_friend_add_resp]
>>> 0-glusterd:
>>> > > > > > Responded to gluster1 (0), ret: 0, op_ret: -1
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > Interestingly there are no entries in the brick logs of the
>>> rejected
>>> > > > > > server. Well, not surprising as no brick process is running.
>>> The
>>> > > > > > server gluster1 is still in rejected state.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > 'gluster volume start workdata force' starts the brick process
>>> on
>>> > > > > > gluster1, and some heals are happening on gluster2+3, but via
>>> 'gluster
>>> > > > > > volume status workdata' the volumes still aren't complete.
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > gluster1:
>>> > > > > >
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > > > > Brick gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata 49152 0
>>> Y 2523
>>> > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost N/A N/A
>>> Y 2549
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > gluster2:
>>> > > > > > Gluster process TCP Port RDMA
>>> Port Online Pid
>>> > > > > >
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > > > > Brick gluster2:/gluster/md4/workdata 49153 0
>>> Y 1723
>>> > > > > > Brick gluster3:/gluster/md4/workdata 49153 0
>>> Y 2068
>>> > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on localhost N/A N/A
>>> Y 1732
>>> > > > > > Self-heal Daemon on gluster3 N/A N/A
>>> Y 2077
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > Hubert
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > Am Di., 5. März 2019 um 07:58 Uhr schrieb Milind Changire <
>>> mchangir at redhat.com>:
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > There are probably DNS entries or /etc/hosts entries with
>>> the public IP Addresses that the host names (gluster1, gluster2, gluster3)
>>> are getting resolved to.
>>> > > > > > > /etc/resolv.conf would tell which is the default domain
>>> searched for the node names and the DNS servers which respond to the
>>> queries.
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > On Tue, Mar 5, 2019 at 12:14 PM Hu Bert <
>>> revirii at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> Good morning,
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> i have a replicate 3 setup with 2 volumes, running on
>>> version 5.3 on
>>> > > > > > >> debian stretch. This morning i upgraded one server to
>>> version 5.4 and
>>> > > > > > >> rebooted the machine; after the restart i noticed that:
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> - no brick process is running
>>> > > > > > >> - gluster volume status only shows the server itself:
>>> > > > > > >> gluster volume status workdata
>>> > > > > > >> Status of volume: workdata
>>> > > > > > >> Gluster process TCP Port RDMA
>>> Port Online Pid
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > > > > > >> Brick gluster1:/gluster/md4/workdata N/A N/A
>>> N N/A
>>> > > > > > >> NFS Server on localhost N/A N/A
>>> N N/A
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> - gluster peer status on the server
>>> > > > > > >> gluster peer status
>>> > > > > > >> Number of Peers: 2
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster3
>>> > > > > > >> Uuid: c7b4a448-ca6a-4051-877f-788f9ee9bc4a
>>> > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected (Connected)
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster2
>>> > > > > > >> Uuid: 162fea82-406a-4f51-81a3-e90235d8da27
>>> > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected (Connected)
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> - gluster peer status on the other 2 servers:
>>> > > > > > >> gluster peer status
>>> > > > > > >> Number of Peers: 2
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster1
>>> > > > > > >> Uuid: 9a360776-7b58-49ae-831e-a0ce4e4afbef
>>> > > > > > >> State: Peer Rejected (Connected)
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> Hostname: gluster3
>>> > > > > > >> Uuid: c7b4a448-ca6a-4051-877f-788f9ee9bc4a
>>> > > > > > >> State: Peer in Cluster (Connected)
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> I noticed that, in the brick logs, i see that the public IP
>>> is used
>>> > > > > > >> instead of the LAN IP. brick logs from one of the volumes:
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> rejected node: https://pastebin.com/qkpj10Sd
>>> > > > > > >> connected nodes: https://pastebin.com/8SxVVYFV
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> Why is the public IP suddenly used instead of the LAN IP?
>>> Killing all
>>> > > > > > >> gluster processes and rebooting (again) didn't help.
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >>
>>> > > > > > >> Thx,
>>> > > > > > >> Hubert
>>> > > > > > >> _______________________________________________
>>> > > > > > >> Gluster-users mailing list
>>> > > > > > >> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>> > > > > > >> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > --
>>> > > > > > > Milind
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > > > Gluster-users mailing list
>>> > > > > Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>> > > > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > --
>>> > > > Regards,
>>> > > > Hari Gowtham.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Regards,
>>> > Hari Gowtham.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Gluster-users mailing list
>>> Gluster-users at gluster.org
>>> https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20190306/02e1210b/attachment.html>
More information about the Gluster-users
mailing list