Bug 1404110

Summary: [Eventing]: POSIX_SAME_GFID event seen for .trashcan folder and .trashcan/internal_op
Product: [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Gluster Storage Reporter: Sweta Anandpara <sanandpa>
Component: eventsapiAssignee: Ashish Pandey <aspandey>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Sweta Anandpara <sanandpa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: rhgs-3.2CC: amukherj, pkarampu, rcyriac, storage-qa-internal
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: RHGS 3.2.0   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: glusterfs-3.8.4-10 Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
: 1406348 (view as bug list) Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-03-23 05:56:27 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: 1351528, 1406348, 1407014    

Description Sweta Anandpara 2016-12-13 06:01:09 UTC
Description of problem:
=======================
In my 4-node cluster with eventing enabled and webhook configured as a listener, chanced upon EVENT_POSIX_SAME_GFID for .trashcan and .trashcan/internal_op folders, and not for any of the other paths, during my testing. Looks like this event is masked for all paths, but not for .trashcan. 
Raising a BZ after confirming it with Pranith.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
=============================================================
3.8.4-7

How reproducible:
=================
Many times


Additional info:
==================
[root@dhcp47-26 ~]# rpm -qa | grep gluster
glusterfs-events-3.8.4-7.el7rhgs.x86_64
glusterfs-geo-replication-3.8.4-7.el7rhgs.x86_64
glusterfs-fuse-3.8.4-7.el7rhgs.x86_64
vdsm-gluster-4.17.33-1.el7rhgs.noarch
glusterfs-3.8.4-7.el7rhgs.x86_64
glusterfs-cli-3.8.4-7.el7rhgs.x86_64
gluster-nagios-addons-0.2.8-1.el7rhgs.x86_64
gluster-nagios-common-0.2.4-1.el7rhgs.noarch
glusterfs-client-xlators-3.8.4-7.el7rhgs.x86_64
glusterfs-server-3.8.4-7.el7rhgs.x86_64
glusterfs-api-3.8.4-7.el7rhgs.x86_64
glusterfs-libs-3.8.4-7.el7rhgs.x86_64
python-gluster-3.8.4-7.el7rhgs.noarch
[root@dhcp47-26 ~]#

Comment 2 Sweta Anandpara 2016-12-13 06:05:17 UTC
Missed pasting this in the description.

"{u'message': {u'gfid': u'00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000005', u'newpath': u'/.trashcan/', u'brick': u'dhcp41-210.lab.eng.blr.redhat.com:/bricks/brick0/a3', u'path': u'/bricks/brick0/a3/.glusterfs/00/00/00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000001/.trashcan'}, u'event': u'POSIX_SAME_GFID', u'ts': 1477475560, u'nodeid': u'461896db-d8a7-4881-82fc-42d6042e80c4'}

Comment 3 Pranith Kumar K 2016-12-14 07:39:02 UTC
This issue comes only when we do a brick stop and brick start which is not an event we do frequently. Shwetha is also trying to recreate to see if there are any other code paths where this appears. After discussing with Shwetha, we are of the opinion that we can defer this at the moment and if Shwetha finds that there are other code paths which can lead to this event showing up frequently then we can bring it back for 3.2.0.

Comment 6 Ashish Pandey 2016-12-20 11:38:35 UTC
mainline patch posted - http://review.gluster.org/#/c/16212/

Comment 9 Sweta Anandpara 2017-02-07 10:36:59 UTC
Tested and verified this on the build 3.8.4-13.

Steps to reproduce:
==================
1. Have a distribute replicate volume on a gluster cluster, with eventing enabled.
2. Kill one of the brick processes
3. Start the volume by force, thereby starting the brick process again.

When the events were monitored on the webhook, no POSIX_SAME_GFID events were seen on .trashcan and entries under it. 

Moving this BZ to verified in 3.2.

Comment 11 errata-xmlrpc 2017-03-23 05:56:27 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2017-0486.html