Bug 1379028

+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1378072 +++

regards
Aravinda

On Wednesday 21 September 2016 03:53 PM, Ravishankar N wrote:
> On 09/21/2016 03:34 PM, Aravinda wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> We have following SPLIT_BRAIN events
>>
>> EVENT_AFR_SPLIT_BRAIN, "subvol=%s;msg=file type mismatch;gfid=%s;ia_type-%d=%s;ia_type-%d=%s"
>> EVENT_AFR_SPLIT_BRAIN, "subvol=%s;msg=gfid mismatch. Skipping conservative merge.;file=<gfid:%s>/%s>;count=2;child-%d=%s;gfid-%d=%s;child-%d=%s;gfid-%d=%s",
>> EVENT_AFR_SPLIT_BRAIN, "subvol=%s;msg=file type mismatch. Skipping conservative merge;file=<gfid:%s>/%s>;count=2;child-%d=%s;type-%d=%s;child-%d=%s;type-%d=%s",
>> EVENT_AFR_SPLIT_BRAIN, "subvol=%s;msg=file type mismatch;file=<gfid:%s>/%s;count=2;child-%d=%s;type-%d=%s;child-%d=%s;type-%d=%s"
>> EVENT_AFR_SPLIT_BRAIN, "subvol=%s;msg=gfid mismatch;file=<gfid:%s>/%s;count=2;child-%d=%s;gfid-%d=%s;child-%d=%s;gfid-%d=%s"
>>
>> Message keys are not same even though Split brain type is same. For example,
>>
>> EVENT_AFR_SPLIT_BRAIN, "subvol=%s;msg=file type mismatch;gfid=%s;ia_type-%d=%s;ia_type-%d=%s"
>> EVENT_AFR_SPLIT_BRAIN, "subvol=%s;msg=file type mismatch;file=<gfid:%s>/%s;count=2;child-%d=%s;type-%d=%s;child-%d=%s;type-%d=%s"
>>
>> We can split these events into two types.(Message included as EVENT name itself, so that no separate msg is required.)
>>
>> EVENT_AFR_SPLIT_BRAIN_FILE_TYPE_MISMATCH, "subvol=%s;file=<gfid:%s>/%s;count=2;child-%d=%s;type-%d=%s;child-%d=%s;type-%d=%s"
>> EVENT_AFR_SPLIT_BRAIN_GFID_MISMATCH, "subvol=%s;file=<gfid:%s>/%s>;count=2;child-%d=%s;gfid-%d=%s;child-%d=%s;gfid-%d=%s"
>>
>> Let me know your thoughts.
>>
>
> I think it is better to retain one EVENT type for split-brains. Otherwise we need to keep on adding different EVENT types for example when we need to propagate data split-brain or metadata split-brain etc.
> The msg=<message> also gives us a way to specific a more verbose message that is immediately available to the consumer, should they decide to parse it. Also, for all types of split-brains, there has to be a remedial action (i.e. resolving the split-brains) required by the admin. Having to monitor only one EVENT type for all split-brains would make  it easier is what I feel.
If it is one event type, then I would prefer "type" instead of msg. (type can be gfid|file|data|meta etc). Descriptive message is not required since these APIs are consumed programatically, free text and non uniform key names breaks the parsing.
>
> -Ravi

--- Additional comment from Worker Ant on 2016-09-23 05:50:57 EDT ---

REVIEW: http://review.gluster.org/15550 (afr: Modifications to afr events) posted (#1) for review on master by Ravishankar N (ravishankar)

--- Additional comment from Worker Ant on 2016-09-23 10:45:29 EDT ---

COMMIT: http://review.gluster.org/15550 committed in master by Pranith Kumar Karampuri (pkarampu) 
------
commit f6a3c541941df6fd19ef57185aca5c4bcec2dec3
Author: Ravishankar N <ravishankar>
Date:   Fri Sep 23 15:16:46 2016 +0530

    afr: Modifications to afr events
    
    Modified afr event message to add a 'type' key as detailed in the BZ.
    Also added events for data and metadata split-brain.
    
    Change-Id: I8156674b4b6a501499fc10fd68e05115fdaef3e4
    BUG: 1378072
    Signed-off-by: Ravishankar N <ravishankar>
    Reviewed-on: http://review.gluster.org/15550
    Smoke: Gluster Build System <jenkins.org>
    NetBSD-regression: NetBSD Build System <jenkins.org>
    CentOS-regression: Gluster Build System <jenkins.org>
    Reviewed-by: Pranith Kumar Karampuri <pkarampu>