Bug 1223691

Summary: [RFE] [geo-rep]: With the addition of LAST_SYNCED in status detail, checkpoint can be removed
Product: [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Gluster Storage Reporter: Rahul Hinduja <rhinduja>
Component: geo-replicationAssignee: Aravinda VK <avishwan>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: storage-qa-internal <storage-qa-internal>
Severity: low Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: rhgs-3.1CC: avishwan, chrisw, csaba, nlevinki
Target Milestone: ---Keywords: FutureFeature
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-01-13 13:34:31 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1223636    

Description Rahul Hinduja 2015-05-21 09:04:40 UTC 
Description of problem:
=======================

The purpose of checkpoint in status was to track whether the files to the time is synced or not. With the addition of last_synced in the status the usecase of checkpoint is very minimal and can be removed. 

The status detail command is too large to fit in the screen for user to track, we can avoid displaying things which do not make sense any more. 

Checkpoint Completed yes/no is another such thing. It sets the value yes/no based out of "If last_synced > checkpoint time" set yes else set no. 

This is how current status details output is:

[root@georep1 scripts]# gluster volume geo-replication master 10.70.46.154::slave status detail
 
MASTER NODE    MASTER VOL    MASTER BRICK      SLAVE USER    SLAVE                  SLAVE NODE      STATUS     CRAWL STATUS       LAST_SYNCED            ENTRY    DATA    META    FAILURES    CHECKPOINT TIME        CHECKPOINT COMPLETED    CHECKPOINT COMPLETION TIME   
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
georep1        master        /rhs/brick1/b1    root          10.70.46.154::slave    10.70.46.101    Passive    N/A                N/A                    N/A      N/A     N/A     N/A         N/A                    N/A                     N/A                          
georep1        master        /rhs/brick2/b2    root          10.70.46.154::slave    10.70.46.101    Passive    N/A                N/A                    N/A      N/A     N/A     N/A         N/A                    N/A                     2015-05-21 14:00:57          
georep3        master        /rhs/brick1/b1    root          10.70.46.154::slave    10.70.46.154    Active     Changelog Crawl    2015-05-21 14:03:50    0        377     0       0           2015-05-21 13:59:24    Yes                     2015-05-21 14:14:10          
georep3        master        /rhs/brick2/b2    root          10.70.46.154::slave    10.70.46.154    Active     Changelog Crawl    2015-05-21 14:02:02    0        372     0       0           2015-05-21 13:59:24    Yes                     2015-05-21 14:04:37          
georep2        master        /rhs/brick1/b1    root          10.70.46.154::slave    10.70.46.103    Passive    N/A                N/A                    N/A      N/A     N/A     N/A         N/A                    N/A                     N/A                          
georep2        master        /rhs/brick2/b2    root          10.70.46.154::slave    10.70.46.103    Passive    N/A                N/A                    N/A      N/A     N/A     N/A         N/A                    N/A                     N/A                          
[root@georep1 scripts]# 




Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

glusterfs-3.7.0-2.el6rhs.x86_64
Comment 2 Aravinda VK 2015-05-22 08:14:13 UTC 
Since Checkpoints are used in many cases like during Cluster Failover/Failback and Replace brick scenarios. We will plan to move checkpoint as separate command and with multiple checkpoint support. BZ for multiple Checkpoints 889171
Comment 3 Rahul Hinduja 2016-01-13 13:34:31 UTC 
As mentioned in comment 2 the checkpoints remains valid in different scenarios. Hyper-convergence use case is based on checkpoints. Closing this request of enhancements.