On Wed, 2018-08-15 at 13:42 +0800, Pui Edylie wrote:
> Hi Karli,
>
> I think Alex is right in regards with the NFS version and state.
>
> I am only using NFSv3 and the failover is working per expectation.
OK, so I've remade the test again and it goes like this:
1) Start copy loop[*]
2) Power off hv02
3) Copy loop stalls indefinitely
I have attached a snippet of the ctdb log that looks interesting but
doesn't say much to me execpt that something's wrong:)
[*]: while true; do mount -o vers=3 hv03v.localdomain:/data /mnt/; dd
if=/var/tmp/test.bin of=/mnt/test.bin bs=1M status=progress; rm -fv
/mnt/test.bin; umount /mnt; done
Thanks in advance!
/K
>
> In my use case, I have 3 nodes with ESXI 6.7 as OS and setup 1x
> gluster VM on each of the ESXI host using its local datastore.
>
> Once I have formed the replicate 3, I use the CTDB VIP to present the
> NFS3 back to the Vcenter and uses it as a shared storage.
>
> Everything works great other than performance is not very good ... I
> am still looking for ways to improve it.
>
> Cheers,
> Edy
>
> On 8/15/2018 12:25 AM, Alex Chekholko wrote:
> > Hi Karli,
> >
> > I'm not 100% sure this is related, but when I set up my ZFS NFS HA
> > per https://github.com/ewwhite/zfs-ha/wiki I was not able to get
> > the failover to work with NFS v4 but only with NFS v3.
> >
> > From the client point of view, it really looked like with NFS v4
> > there is an open file handle and that just goes stale and hangs, or
> > something like that, whereas with NFSv3 the client retries and
> > recovers and continues. I did not investigate further, I just use
> > v3. I think it has something to do with NFSv4 being "stateful" and
> > NFSv3 being "stateless".
> >
> > Can you re-run your test but using NFSv3 on the client mount? Or
> > do you need to use v4.x?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Alex
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 6:11 AM Karli Sjöberg
> > wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2018-08-10 at 09:39 -0400, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote:
> > > > On 08/10/2018 09:23 AM, Karli Sjöberg wrote:
> > > > > On Fri, 2018-08-10 at 21:23 +0800, Pui Edylie wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Karli,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Storhaug works with glusterfs 4.1.2 and latest nfs-ganesha.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I just installed them last weekend ... they are working
> > > very well
> > > > > > :)
> > > > >
> > > > > Okay, awesome!
> > > > >
> > > > > Is there any documentation on how to do that?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/gluster/storhaug/wiki
> > > >
> > >
> > > Thanks Kaleb and Edy!
> > >
> > > I have now redone the cluster using the latest and greatest
> > > following
> > > the above guide and repeated the same test I was doing before
> > > (the
> > > rsync while loop) with success. I let (forgot) it run for about a
> > > day
> > > and it was still chugging along nicely when I aborted it, so
> > > success
> > > there!
> > >
> > > On to the next test; the catastrophic failure test- where one of
> > > the
> > > servers dies, I'm having a more difficult time with.
> > >
> > > 1) I start with mounting the share over NFS 4.1 and then proceed
> > > with
> > > writing a 8 GiB large random data file with 'dd', while "hard-
> > > cutting"
> > > the power to the server I'm writing to, the transfer just stops
> > > indefinitely, until the server comes back again. Is that supposed
> > > to
> > > happen? Like this:
> > >
> > > # dd if=/dev/urandom of=/var/tmp/test.bin bs=1M count=8192
> > > # mount -o vers=4.1 hv03v.localdomain:/data /mnt/
> > > # dd if=/var/tmp/test.bin of=/mnt/test.bin bs=1M status=progress
> > > 2434793472 bytes (2,4 GB, 2,3 GiB) copied, 42 s, 57,9 MB/s
> > >
> > > (here I cut the power and let it be for almost two hours before
> > > turning
> > > it on again)
> > >
> > > dd: error writing '/mnt/test.bin': Remote I/O error
> > > 2325+0 records in
> > > 2324+0 records out
> > > 2436890624 bytes (2,4 GB, 2,3 GiB) copied, 6944,84 s, 351 kB/s
> > > # umount /mnt
> > >
> > > Here the unmount command hung and I had to hard reset the client.
> > >
> > > 2) Another question I have is why some files "change" as you copy
> > > them
> > > out to the Gluster storage? Is that the way it should be? This
> > > time, I
> > > deleted eveything in the destination directory to start over:
> > >
> > > # mount -o vers=4.1 hv03v.localdomain:/data /mnt/
> > > # rm -f /mnt/test.bin
> > > # dd if=/var/tmp/test.bin of=/mnt/test.bin bs=1M status=progress
> > > 8557428736 bytes (8,6 GB, 8,0 GiB) copied, 122 s, 70,1 MB/s
> > > 8192+0 records in
> > > 8192+0 records out
> > > 8589934592 bytes (8,6 GB, 8,0 GiB) copied, 123,039 s, 69,8 MB/s
> > > # md5sum /var/tmp/test.bin
> > > 073867b68fa8eaa382ffe05adb90b583 /var/tmp/test.bin
> > > # md5sum /mnt/test.bin
> > > 634187d367f856f3f5fb31846f796397 /mnt/test.bin
> > > # umount /mnt
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance!
> > >
> > > /K
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Gluster-users mailing list
> > > Gluster-users@gluster.org
> > > https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
> _______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users