On Tue, Apr 7, 2020 at 8:16 PM Strahil Nikolov <hunter86_bg(a)yahoo.com
wrote:
Hi Gianluca,
The positive thing is that you can reproduce the issue.
I would ask you to check your gluster version and if there are any
updates - update the cluster.
I'd prefer to stick on oVirt release version of Gluster if possible
Also check the gluster's op-version, as this limits some of the features.
What do you mean by thgis?
> If there are none - enable trace logs in gluster (
>
https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_gluster_storage/3.1...
> ), start volume peofiling, reproduce the issue and then reduce the log
> level (it's generating a lot of logs) and stop the profiling.
> Once that info is collected, some of the Gluster members
can check the
> situation.
> Best Regards,
> Strahil Nikolov
Ok. I think that the INFO level set on the different layers outlined
problem somehow related to shardin.
Related to this, I found no official docs on Gluster web site after 3.7
version... where is it?
Only information I found was in Red Hat Gluster Storage 3.5 Administration
Guide, but I would expect something more upstream...
In particular in my case where I have only one host and the gluster volumes
are single brick based, do you think I can try to disable sharding and
verify if using new disks with it disabled and oVirt thin provisioned disks
let the problem go away?
Also, I found some information about sharding block size.
Apparently the only supported size on Red Hat Gluster Storage is 512MB, but
oVirt sets it to 64MB....?
I also found a bugzilla about passing from 128MB to 64MB in oVirt 4.1.5:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1469436
Now I see that by default and so also in my environment I have:
features.shard on
features.shard-block-size 64MB
features.shard-lru-limit 16384
features.shard-deletion-rate 100
Not clear how to cross-check for all the values above in docs....
Can I safely set
features.shard off
In Red Hat Gluster storage admin guide it is considered only for replicated
gluster volumes (and so also ditributed-replicated...)
But in my case with single host and single beick for volumes I think it
doesn't give any particular benefit, isn't it?
I found this interesting post about sharding and connection between image
files and shard files:
http://opensource-storage.blogspot.com/2016/07/de-mystifying-gluster-shar...
Gianluca