Hide Forgot
[Migrated from RT] - ticket 814 [http://support.gluster.com/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=814] Wed Mar 11 05:08:56 2009 guru - Ticket created Version: glusterfs 2.0.0 pre30 .. 87: volume ioc 88: type performance/io-cache 89: subvolumes unify 90: option cache-size 500MB 91: option cache-timeout 3600 92: end-volume .. 2009-03-11 15:35:10 W [xlator.c:167:_volume_option_value_validate] ioc: '3600' in 'option cache-timeout 3600' is out of range [0 - 60] 2009-03-11 15:35:10 N [glusterfsd.c:1134:main] glusterfs: Successfully started -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- # Wed Mar 11 07:59:17 2009 amar - Correspondence added Subject: Re: [support.gluster.com #814] [ glusterfs 2.0.0 pre30 ] - Glusterfs does not error out upon out of range option value Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 07:59:15 -0700 To: rt From: Amar Tumballi <amar> Download (untitled) [text/plain 684b] This is intentional. We don't want to error out for range check. The idea was to give an idea to users about the possible range, but even the out of ranges should work fine. Also, for few options, we *think* a range suits it best, but are not sure if thats the best. hence we are not erroring out, but giving users to try different values. Regards, On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 5:08 AM, Gururaj K via RT <rt> wrote: > > > .. > 2009-03-11 15:35:10 W [xlator.c:167:_volume_option_value_validate] ioc: > '3600' in 'option cache-timeout 3600' is out of range [0 - 60] > 2009-03-11 15:35:10 N [glusterfsd.c:1134:main] glusterfs: Successfully > started > > > -- Amar Tumballi -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- # Thu Mar 12 00:21:03 2009 vikas - Correspondence added On Wed Mar 11 07:59:17 2009, amar wrote: > This is intentional. We don't want to error out for range check. The idea > was to give an idea to users about the possible range, but even the out of > ranges should work fine. Also, for few options, we *think* a range suits it > best, but are not sure if thats the best. hence we are not erroring out, but > giving users to try different values. That does not make sense. If we want to 'recommend' certain values to users, the proper place to do it is in the documentation. When we are _validating_, then the minimum and maximum values should be strictly enforced. If this validation is not strict, then some translators will have to do validation on their own (for example, io-threads might want that number of threads be atleast 1), thus defeating the whole purpose of xlator_options. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- # Thu Apr 23 17:49:13 2009 gowda - Correspondence added what is the status of this error report? -- gowda
Working as desired.