Bug 765401 (GLUSTER-3669)
Summary: | Add a method to resolve peers in rejected state due to volume checksum difference | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Community] GlusterFS | Reporter: | Joe Julian <joe> | ||||
Component: | glusterd | Assignee: | krishnan parthasarathi <kparthas> | ||||
Status: | CLOSED DUPLICATE | QA Contact: | |||||
Severity: | low | Docs Contact: | |||||
Priority: | medium | ||||||
Version: | 3.1.7 | CC: | gluster-bugs, ndevos, nsathyan, rwheeler | ||||
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: | 2014-10-21 13:48:56 UTC | Type: | --- | ||||
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||
Embargoed: | |||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Joe Julian
2011-09-29 22:58:08 UTC
bug 865700 is for similar reason, hope should be enough to handle this issue? Let us take a cluster of 2 nodes, namely Node1 and Node2. Let us say that the following events happened in the cluster, On Node1: ------- t0 - gluster peer probe Node2 t1 - gluster volume create vol Node1:brick1 Node2:brick2 t2 - gluster volume start vol On Node2: --------- t3 - glusterd dies On Node1: --------- t4 - gluster volume set vol write-behind off t5 - glusterd dies On Node2: --------- t6 - glusterd is restarted t7 - gluster volume set vol read-ahead off On Node1: --------- t8 - glusterd is restarted [At this point we have the glusterd peers in Rejected state] Let us assume that we want the volume to be in the state as perceived by Node1, On Node2: gluster volume sync Node1 $vol, for each $vol in the cluster. PS: The following patches fixes the issue, master: 1) http://review.gluster.com/4624 2) http://review.gluster.com/4815 (pending review) release-3.4: 1) http://review.gluster.com/4643 This should be fixed with 3.4 as mentioned in the previous comment. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 950048 *** |