ovirt with glusterfs - big test - unwanted results

This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070802090208020205070907 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, we tried the following test - with unwanted results input: 5 node gluster A = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node1+node2+arbiter on node 5 ) B = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node3+node4+arbiter on node 5 ) C = distributed replica 3 arbiter 1 ( node1+node2, node3+node4, each arbiter on node 5) node 5 has only arbiter replica ( 4x ) TEST: 1) directly reboot one node - OK ( is not important which ( data node or arbiter node )) 2) directly reboot two nodes - OK ( if nodes are not from the same replica ) 3) directly reboot three nodes - yes, this is the main problem and a questions .... - rebooted all three nodes from replica "B" ( not so possible, but who knows ... ) - all VMs with data on this replica was paused ( no data access ) - OK - all VMs running on replica "B" nodes lost ( started manually, later )( datas on other replicas ) - acceptable BUT - !!! all oVIrt domains went down !! - master domain is on replica "A" which lost only one member from three !!! so we are not expecting that all domain will go down, especially master with 2 live members. Results: - the whole cluster unreachable until at all domains up - depent of all nodes up !!! - all paused VMs started back - OK - rest of all VMs rebooted and runnig - OK Questions: 1) why all domains down if master domain ( on replica "A" ) has two runnig members ( 2 of 3 ) ?? 2) how to fix that colaps without waiting to all nodes up ? ( in worste case if node has HW error eg. ) ?? 3) which oVirt cluster policy can prevent that situation ?? ( if any ) regs. Pavel --------------070802090208020205070907 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit <html> <head> <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"> </head> <body text="#000066" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> Hello, <br> we tried the following test - with unwanted results<br> <br> input:<br> 5 node gluster<br> A = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node1+node2+arbiter on node 5 )<br> B = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node3+node4+arbiter on node 5 )<br> C = distributed replica 3 arbiter 1 ( node1+node2, node3+node4, each arbiter on node 5)<br> node 5 has only arbiter replica ( 4x )<br> <br> TEST:<br> 1) directly reboot one node - OK ( is not important which ( data node or arbiter node ))<br> 2) directly reboot two nodes - OK ( if nodes are not from the same replica ) <br> 3) directly reboot three nodes - yes, this is the main problem and a questions ....<br> - rebooted all three nodes from replica "B" ( not so possible, but who knows ... )<br> - all VMs with data on this replica was paused ( no data access ) - OK<br> - all VMs running on replica "B" nodes lost ( started manually, later )( datas on other replicas ) - acceptable<br> BUT<br> - !!! all oVIrt domains went down !! - master domain is on replica "A" which lost only one member from three !!!<br> so we are not expecting that all domain will go down, especially master with 2 live members.<br> <br> Results: <br> - the whole cluster unreachable until at all domains up - depent of all nodes up !!!<br> - all paused VMs started back - OK<br> - rest of all VMs rebooted and runnig - OK<br> <br> Questions:<br> 1) why all domains down if master domain ( on replica "A" ) has two runnig members ( 2 of 3 ) ??<br> 2) how to fix that colaps without waiting to all nodes up ? ( in worste case if node has HW error eg. ) ??<br> 3) which oVirt cluster policy can prevent that situation ?? ( if any )<br> <br> regs.<br> Pavel<br> <br> <br> </body> </html> --------------070802090208020205070907--

Hi Pavel, Thanks for the report. Can you begin with a more accurate description of your environment? Begin with host, oVirt and Gluster versions. Then continue with the exact setup (what are 'A', 'B', 'C' - domains? Volumes? What is the mapping between domains and volumes?). Are there any logs you can share with us? I'm sure with more information, we'd be happy to look at the issue. Y. On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:09 PM, paf1@email.cz <paf1@email.cz> wrote:
Hello, we tried the following test - with unwanted results
input: 5 node gluster A = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node1+node2+arbiter on node 5 ) B = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node3+node4+arbiter on node 5 ) C = distributed replica 3 arbiter 1 ( node1+node2, node3+node4, each arbiter on node 5) node 5 has only arbiter replica ( 4x )
TEST: 1) directly reboot one node - OK ( is not important which ( data node or arbiter node )) 2) directly reboot two nodes - OK ( if nodes are not from the same replica ) 3) directly reboot three nodes - yes, this is the main problem and a questions .... - rebooted all three nodes from replica "B" ( not so possible, but who knows ... ) - all VMs with data on this replica was paused ( no data access ) - OK - all VMs running on replica "B" nodes lost ( started manually, later )( datas on other replicas ) - acceptable BUT - !!! all oVIrt domains went down !! - master domain is on replica "A" which lost only one member from three !!! so we are not expecting that all domain will go down, especially master with 2 live members.
Results: - the whole cluster unreachable until at all domains up - depent of all nodes up !!! - all paused VMs started back - OK - rest of all VMs rebooted and runnig - OK
Questions: 1) why all domains down if master domain ( on replica "A" ) has two runnig members ( 2 of 3 ) ?? 2) how to fix that colaps without waiting to all nodes up ? ( in worste case if node has HW error eg. ) ?? 3) which oVirt cluster policy can prevent that situation ?? ( if any )
regs. Pavel
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------040008080106010908080300 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello, some envir. answers : ***************************************************** OS = RHEL - 7 - 2.151 kernel = 3.10.0 - 327.10.1.el7.x86_64 KVM = 2.3.0 - 31.el7_2.7.1 libvirt = libvirt-1.2.17-13.el7_2.3 vdsm = vdsm-4.17.23.2-0.el7 glusterfs = glusterfs-3.7.9-1.el7 ovirt = 3.5.6.2-1 ***************************************************** # gluster peer status Number of Peers: 4 Hostname: 1hp2 Uuid: 8e87cf18-8958-41b7-8d24-7ee420a1ef9f State: Peer in Cluster (Connected) Hostname: 2hp2 Uuid: b1d987d8-0b42-4ce4-b85f-83b4072e0990 State: Peer in Cluster (Connected) Hostname: 2hp1 Uuid: a1cbe1a8-88ad-4e89-8a0e-d2bb2b6786d8 State: Peer in Cluster (Connected) Hostname: kvmarbiter Uuid: bb1d63f1-7757-4c07-b70d-aa2f68449e21 State: Peer in Cluster (Connected) ***************************************************** == "C" == Volume Name: 12HP12-D2R3A1P2 Type: Distributed-Replicate Volume ID: 3c22d3dc-7c6e-4e37-9e0b-78410873ed6d Status: Started Number of Bricks: 2 x (2 + 1) = 6 Transport-type: tcp Bricks: Brick1: 1hp1:/STORAGES/P2/GFS Brick2: 1hp2:/STORAGES/P2/GFS Brick3: kvmarbiter:/STORAGES/P2-1/GFS (arbiter) Brick4: 2hp1:/STORAGES/P2/GFS Brick5: 2hp2:/STORAGES/P2/GFS Brick6: kvmarbiter:/STORAGES/P2-2/GFS (arbiter) Options Reconfigured: performance.readdir-ahead: on ***************************************************** == "A" == Volume Name: 1HP12-R3A1P1 Type: Replicate Volume ID: e4121610-6128-4ecc-86d3-1429ab3b8356 Status: Started Number of Bricks: 1 x (2 + 1) = 3 Transport-type: tcp Bricks: Brick1: 1hp1:/STORAGES/P1/GFS Brick2: 1hp2:/STORAGES/P1/GFS Brick3: kvmarbiter:/STORAGES/P1-1/GFS (arbiter) Options Reconfigured: performance.readdir-ahead: on performance.quick-read: off performance.read-ahead: off performance.io-cache: off performance.stat-prefetch: off cluster.eager-lock: enable network.remote-dio: enable cluster.quorum-type: auto cluster.server-quorum-type: server storage.owner-uid: 36 storage.owner-gid: 36 features.shard: on features.shard-block-size: 512MB cluster.data-self-heal-algorithm: full performance.write-behind: on performance.low-prio-threads: 32 performance.write-behind-window-size: 128MB network.ping-timeout: 10 ***************************************************** == "B" == Volume Name: 2HP12-R3A1P1 Type: Replicate Volume ID: d3d260cd-455f-42d6-9580-d88ae6df0519 Status: Started Number of Bricks: 1 x (2 + 1) = 3 Transport-type: tcp Bricks: Brick1: 2hp1:/STORAGES/P1/GFS Brick2: 2hp2:/STORAGES/P1/GFS Brick3: kvmarbiter:/STORAGES/P1-2/GFS (arbiter) Options Reconfigured: performance.readdir-ahead: on performance.quick-read: off performance.read-ahead: off performance.io-cache: off performance.stat-prefetch: off cluster.eager-lock: enable network.remote-dio: enable cluster.quorum-type: auto cluster.server-quorum-type: server storage.owner-uid: 36 storage.owner-gid: 36 features.shard: on features.shard-block-size: 512MB cluster.data-self-heal-algorithm: full performance.write-behind: on performance.low-prio-threads: 32 performance.write-behind-window-size: 128MB network.ping-timeout: 10 The oVirt volumes(storages) have the same name as gluster volumes ( eg: "B" = 2HP12-R3A1P1( ovirt storage ) = 2HP12-R3A1P1( gluster volume name ) ) In the test the master volume was "A" = 1HP12-R3A1P1 regs. Pavel PS: logs will follow as webstore pointer ... this takes some time On 31.3.2016 14:30, Yaniv Kaul wrote:
Hi Pavel,
Thanks for the report. Can you begin with a more accurate description of your environment? Begin with host, oVirt and Gluster versions. Then continue with the exact setup (what are 'A', 'B', 'C' - domains? Volumes? What is the mapping between domains and volumes?).
Are there any logs you can share with us?
I'm sure with more information, we'd be happy to look at the issue. Y.
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:09 PM, paf1@email.cz <mailto:paf1@email.cz> <paf1@email.cz <mailto:paf1@email.cz>> wrote:
Hello, we tried the following test - with unwanted results
input: 5 node gluster A = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node1+node2+arbiter on node 5 ) B = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node3+node4+arbiter on node 5 ) C = distributed replica 3 arbiter 1 ( node1+node2, node3+node4, each arbiter on node 5) node 5 has only arbiter replica ( 4x )
TEST: 1) directly reboot one node - OK ( is not important which ( data node or arbiter node )) 2) directly reboot two nodes - OK ( if nodes are not from the same replica ) 3) directly reboot three nodes - yes, this is the main problem and a questions .... - rebooted all three nodes from replica "B" ( not so possible, but who knows ... ) - all VMs with data on this replica was paused ( no data access ) - OK - all VMs running on replica "B" nodes lost ( started manually, later )( datas on other replicas ) - acceptable BUT - !!! all oVIrt domains went down !! - master domain is on replica "A" which lost only one member from three !!! so we are not expecting that all domain will go down, especially master with 2 live members.
Results: - the whole cluster unreachable until at all domains up - depent of all nodes up !!! - all paused VMs started back - OK - rest of all VMs rebooted and runnig - OK
Questions: 1) why all domains down if master domain ( on replica "A" ) has two runnig members ( 2 of 3 ) ?? 2) how to fix that colaps without waiting to all nodes up ? ( in worste case if node has HW error eg. ) ?? 3) which oVirt cluster policy can prevent that situation ?? ( if any )
regs. Pavel
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org <mailto:Users@ovirt.org> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
--------------040008080106010908080300 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit <html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body text="#000066" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> Hello, <br> some envir. answers :<br> *****************************************************<br> OS = RHEL - 7 - 2.151<br> kernel = 3.10.0 - 327.10.1.el7.x86_64<br> KVM = 2.3.0 - 31.el7_2.7.1<br> libvirt = libvirt-1.2.17-13.el7_2.3<br> vdsm = vdsm-4.17.23.2-0.el7<br> glusterfs = glusterfs-3.7.9-1.el7<br> ovirt = 3.5.6.2-1<br> *****************************************************<br> # gluster peer status<br> Number of Peers: 4<br> <br> Hostname: 1hp2<br> Uuid: 8e87cf18-8958-41b7-8d24-7ee420a1ef9f<br> State: Peer in Cluster (Connected)<br> <br> Hostname: 2hp2<br> Uuid: b1d987d8-0b42-4ce4-b85f-83b4072e0990<br> State: Peer in Cluster (Connected)<br> <br> Hostname: 2hp1<br> Uuid: a1cbe1a8-88ad-4e89-8a0e-d2bb2b6786d8<br> State: Peer in Cluster (Connected)<br> <br> Hostname: kvmarbiter<br> Uuid: bb1d63f1-7757-4c07-b70d-aa2f68449e21<br> State: Peer in Cluster (Connected)<br> *****************************************************<br> == "C" ==<br> Volume Name: 12HP12-D2R3A1P2<br> Type: Distributed-Replicate<br> Volume ID: 3c22d3dc-7c6e-4e37-9e0b-78410873ed6d<br> Status: Started<br> Number of Bricks: 2 x (2 + 1) = 6<br> Transport-type: tcp<br> Bricks:<br> Brick1: 1hp1:/STORAGES/P2/GFS<br> Brick2: 1hp2:/STORAGES/P2/GFS<br> Brick3: kvmarbiter:/STORAGES/P2-1/GFS (arbiter)<br> Brick4: 2hp1:/STORAGES/P2/GFS<br> Brick5: 2hp2:/STORAGES/P2/GFS<br> Brick6: kvmarbiter:/STORAGES/P2-2/GFS (arbiter)<br> Options Reconfigured:<br> performance.readdir-ahead: on<br> *****************************************************<br> == "A" ==<br> Volume Name: 1HP12-R3A1P1<br> Type: Replicate<br> Volume ID: e4121610-6128-4ecc-86d3-1429ab3b8356<br> Status: Started<br> Number of Bricks: 1 x (2 + 1) = 3<br> Transport-type: tcp<br> Bricks:<br> Brick1: 1hp1:/STORAGES/P1/GFS<br> Brick2: 1hp2:/STORAGES/P1/GFS<br> Brick3: kvmarbiter:/STORAGES/P1-1/GFS (arbiter)<br> Options Reconfigured:<br> performance.readdir-ahead: on<br> performance.quick-read: off<br> performance.read-ahead: off<br> performance.io-cache: off<br> performance.stat-prefetch: off<br> cluster.eager-lock: enable<br> network.remote-dio: enable<br> cluster.quorum-type: auto<br> cluster.server-quorum-type: server<br> storage.owner-uid: 36<br> storage.owner-gid: 36<br> features.shard: on<br> features.shard-block-size: 512MB<br> cluster.data-self-heal-algorithm: full<br> performance.write-behind: on<br> performance.low-prio-threads: 32<br> performance.write-behind-window-size: 128MB<br> network.ping-timeout: 10<br> *****************************************************<br> == "B" ==<br> Volume Name: 2HP12-R3A1P1<br> Type: Replicate<br> Volume ID: d3d260cd-455f-42d6-9580-d88ae6df0519<br> Status: Started<br> Number of Bricks: 1 x (2 + 1) = 3<br> Transport-type: tcp<br> Bricks:<br> Brick1: 2hp1:/STORAGES/P1/GFS<br> Brick2: 2hp2:/STORAGES/P1/GFS<br> Brick3: kvmarbiter:/STORAGES/P1-2/GFS (arbiter)<br> Options Reconfigured:<br> performance.readdir-ahead: on<br> performance.quick-read: off<br> performance.read-ahead: off<br> performance.io-cache: off<br> performance.stat-prefetch: off<br> cluster.eager-lock: enable<br> network.remote-dio: enable<br> cluster.quorum-type: auto<br> cluster.server-quorum-type: server<br> storage.owner-uid: 36<br> storage.owner-gid: 36<br> features.shard: on<br> features.shard-block-size: 512MB<br> cluster.data-self-heal-algorithm: full<br> performance.write-behind: on<br> performance.low-prio-threads: 32<br> performance.write-behind-window-size: 128MB<br> network.ping-timeout: 10<br> <br> <br> The oVirt volumes(storages) have the same name as gluster volumes ( eg: "B" = 2HP12-R3A1P1( ovirt storage ) = 2HP12-R3A1P1( gluster volume name ) )<br> In the test the master volume was "A" = 1HP12-R3A1P1<br> <br> regs. Pavel<br> PS: logs will follow as webstore pointer ... this takes some time <br> <br> <br> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 31.3.2016 14:30, Yaniv Kaul wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote cite="mid:CAJgorsaOUQ_42GUSPh-H1vGUgJ114JYcUHR8vHwvmcWR+w8Jmw@mail.gmail.com" type="cite"> <div dir="ltr">Hi Pavel, <div><br> </div> <div>Thanks for the report. Can you begin with a more accurate description of your environment?</div> <div>Begin with host, oVirt and Gluster versions. Then continue with the exact setup (what are 'A', 'B', 'C' - domains? Volumes? What is the mapping between domains and volumes?).</div> <div><br> </div> <div>Are there any logs you can share with us?</div> <div><br> </div> <div>I'm sure with more information, we'd be happy to look at the issue.</div> <div>Y.</div> <div><br> </div> </div> <div class="gmail_extra"><br> <div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:09 PM, <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz">paf1@email.cz</a> <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz" target="_blank">paf1@email.cz</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <div text="#000066" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> Hello, <br> we tried the following test - with unwanted results<br> <br> input:<br> 5 node gluster<br> A = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node1+node2+arbiter on node 5 )<br> B = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node3+node4+arbiter on node 5 )<br> C = distributed replica 3 arbiter 1 ( node1+node2, node3+node4, each arbiter on node 5)<br> node 5 has only arbiter replica ( 4x )<br> <br> TEST:<br> 1) directly reboot one node - OK ( is not important which ( data node or arbiter node ))<br> 2) directly reboot two nodes - OK ( if nodes are not from the same replica ) <br> 3) directly reboot three nodes - yes, this is the main problem and a questions ....<br> - rebooted all three nodes from replica "B" ( not so possible, but who knows ... )<br> - all VMs with data on this replica was paused ( no data access ) - OK<br> - all VMs running on replica "B" nodes lost ( started manually, later )( datas on other replicas ) - acceptable<br> BUT<br> - !!! all oVIrt domains went down !! - master domain is on replica "A" which lost only one member from three !!!<br> so we are not expecting that all domain will go down, especially master with 2 live members.<br> <br> Results: <br> - the whole cluster unreachable until at all domains up - depent of all nodes up !!!<br> - all paused VMs started back - OK<br> - rest of all VMs rebooted and runnig - OK<br> <br> Questions:<br> 1) why all domains down if master domain ( on replica "A" ) has two runnig members ( 2 of 3 ) ??<br> 2) how to fix that colaps without waiting to all nodes up ? ( in worste case if node has HW error eg. ) ??<br> 3) which oVirt cluster policy can prevent that situation ?? ( if any )<br> <br> regs.<br> Pavel<br> <br> <br> </div> <br> _______________________________________________<br> Users mailing list<br> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Users@ovirt.org">Users@ovirt.org</a><br> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br> <br> </blockquote> </div> <br> </div> </blockquote> <br> </body> </html> --------------040008080106010908080300--

This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------050907030908030304090009 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, rest of logs: www.uschovna.cz/en/zasilka/HYGXR57CNHM3TP39-L3W <http://www.uschovna.cz/en/zasilka/HYGXR57CNHM3TP39-L3W> The TEST is the last big event in logs .... TEST TIME : about 14:00-14:30 CET regs.Pavel On 31.3.2016 14:30, Yaniv Kaul wrote:
Hi Pavel,
Thanks for the report. Can you begin with a more accurate description of your environment? Begin with host, oVirt and Gluster versions. Then continue with the exact setup (what are 'A', 'B', 'C' - domains? Volumes? What is the mapping between domains and volumes?).
Are there any logs you can share with us?
I'm sure with more information, we'd be happy to look at the issue. Y.
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:09 PM, paf1@email.cz <mailto:paf1@email.cz> <paf1@email.cz <mailto:paf1@email.cz>> wrote:
Hello, we tried the following test - with unwanted results
input: 5 node gluster A = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node1+node2+arbiter on node 5 ) B = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node3+node4+arbiter on node 5 ) C = distributed replica 3 arbiter 1 ( node1+node2, node3+node4, each arbiter on node 5) node 5 has only arbiter replica ( 4x )
TEST: 1) directly reboot one node - OK ( is not important which ( data node or arbiter node )) 2) directly reboot two nodes - OK ( if nodes are not from the same replica ) 3) directly reboot three nodes - yes, this is the main problem and a questions .... - rebooted all three nodes from replica "B" ( not so possible, but who knows ... ) - all VMs with data on this replica was paused ( no data access ) - OK - all VMs running on replica "B" nodes lost ( started manually, later )( datas on other replicas ) - acceptable BUT - !!! all oVIrt domains went down !! - master domain is on replica "A" which lost only one member from three !!! so we are not expecting that all domain will go down, especially master with 2 live members.
Results: - the whole cluster unreachable until at all domains up - depent of all nodes up !!! - all paused VMs started back - OK - rest of all VMs rebooted and runnig - OK
Questions: 1) why all domains down if master domain ( on replica "A" ) has two runnig members ( 2 of 3 ) ?? 2) how to fix that colaps without waiting to all nodes up ? ( in worste case if node has HW error eg. ) ?? 3) which oVirt cluster policy can prevent that situation ?? ( if any )
regs. Pavel
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org <mailto:Users@ovirt.org> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
--------------050907030908030304090009 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit <html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body text="#000066" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> Hi, <br> rest of logs:<br> <a href="http://www.uschovna.cz/en/zasilka/HYGXR57CNHM3TP39-L3W" style="text-decoration:none;color:#ff9c00;">www.uschovna.cz/en/zasilka/HYGXR57CNHM3TP39-L3W</a><br> <br> The TEST is the last big event in logs ....<br> TEST TIME : about 14:00-14:30 CET<br> <br> regs.Pavel<br> <br> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 31.3.2016 14:30, Yaniv Kaul wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote cite="mid:CAJgorsaOUQ_42GUSPh-H1vGUgJ114JYcUHR8vHwvmcWR+w8Jmw@mail.gmail.com" type="cite"> <div dir="ltr">Hi Pavel, <div><br> </div> <div>Thanks for the report. Can you begin with a more accurate description of your environment?</div> <div>Begin with host, oVirt and Gluster versions. Then continue with the exact setup (what are 'A', 'B', 'C' - domains? Volumes? What is the mapping between domains and volumes?).</div> <div><br> </div> <div>Are there any logs you can share with us?</div> <div><br> </div> <div>I'm sure with more information, we'd be happy to look at the issue.</div> <div>Y.</div> <div><br> </div> </div> <div class="gmail_extra"><br> <div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:09 PM, <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz">paf1@email.cz</a> <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz" target="_blank">paf1@email.cz</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <div text="#000066" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> Hello, <br> we tried the following test - with unwanted results<br> <br> input:<br> 5 node gluster<br> A = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node1+node2+arbiter on node 5 )<br> B = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node3+node4+arbiter on node 5 )<br> C = distributed replica 3 arbiter 1 ( node1+node2, node3+node4, each arbiter on node 5)<br> node 5 has only arbiter replica ( 4x )<br> <br> TEST:<br> 1) directly reboot one node - OK ( is not important which ( data node or arbiter node ))<br> 2) directly reboot two nodes - OK ( if nodes are not from the same replica ) <br> 3) directly reboot three nodes - yes, this is the main problem and a questions ....<br> - rebooted all three nodes from replica "B" ( not so possible, but who knows ... )<br> - all VMs with data on this replica was paused ( no data access ) - OK<br> - all VMs running on replica "B" nodes lost ( started manually, later )( datas on other replicas ) - acceptable<br> BUT<br> - !!! all oVIrt domains went down !! - master domain is on replica "A" which lost only one member from three !!!<br> so we are not expecting that all domain will go down, especially master with 2 live members.<br> <br> Results: <br> - the whole cluster unreachable until at all domains up - depent of all nodes up !!!<br> - all paused VMs started back - OK<br> - rest of all VMs rebooted and runnig - OK<br> <br> Questions:<br> 1) why all domains down if master domain ( on replica "A" ) has two runnig members ( 2 of 3 ) ??<br> 2) how to fix that colaps without waiting to all nodes up ? ( in worste case if node has HW error eg. ) ??<br> 3) which oVirt cluster policy can prevent that situation ?? ( if any )<br> <br> regs.<br> Pavel<br> <br> <br> </div> <br> _______________________________________________<br> Users mailing list<br> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Users@ovirt.org">Users@ovirt.org</a><br> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br> <br> </blockquote> </div> <br> </div> </blockquote> <br> </body> </html> --------------050907030908030304090009--

This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------010603000305050305060402 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 03/31/2016 06:41 PM, paf1@email.cz wrote:
Hi, rest of logs: www.uschovna.cz/en/zasilka/HYGXR57CNHM3TP39-L3W <http://www.uschovna.cz/en/zasilka/HYGXR57CNHM3TP39-L3W>
The TEST is the last big event in logs .... TEST TIME : about 14:00-14:30 CET
Thank you Pavel for the interesting test report and sharing the logs. You are right - the master domain should not go down if 2 of 3 bricks are available from volume A (1HP12-R3A1P1). I notice that host kvmarbiter was not responsive at 2016-03-31 13:27:19 , but the ConnectStorageServerVDSCommand executed on kvmarbiter node returned success at 2016-03-31 13:27:26 Could you also share the vdsm logs from 1hp1, 1hp2 and kvmarbiter nodes during this time ? Ravi, Krutika - could you take a look at the gluster logs?
regs.Pavel
On 31.3.2016 14:30, Yaniv Kaul wrote:
Hi Pavel,
Thanks for the report. Can you begin with a more accurate description of your environment? Begin with host, oVirt and Gluster versions. Then continue with the exact setup (what are 'A', 'B', 'C' - domains? Volumes? What is the mapping between domains and volumes?).
Are there any logs you can share with us?
I'm sure with more information, we'd be happy to look at the issue. Y.
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:09 PM, paf1@email.cz <mailto:paf1@email.cz> <paf1@email.cz <mailto:paf1@email.cz>> wrote:
Hello, we tried the following test - with unwanted results
input: 5 node gluster A = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node1+node2+arbiter on node 5 ) B = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node3+node4+arbiter on node 5 ) C = distributed replica 3 arbiter 1 ( node1+node2, node3+node4, each arbiter on node 5) node 5 has only arbiter replica ( 4x )
TEST: 1) directly reboot one node - OK ( is not important which ( data node or arbiter node )) 2) directly reboot two nodes - OK ( if nodes are not from the same replica ) 3) directly reboot three nodes - yes, this is the main problem and a questions .... - rebooted all three nodes from replica "B" ( not so possible, but who knows ... ) - all VMs with data on this replica was paused ( no data access ) - OK - all VMs running on replica "B" nodes lost ( started manually, later )( datas on other replicas ) - acceptable BUT - !!! all oVIrt domains went down !! - master domain is on replica "A" which lost only one member from three !!! so we are not expecting that all domain will go down, especially master with 2 live members.
Results: - the whole cluster unreachable until at all domains up - depent of all nodes up !!! - all paused VMs started back - OK - rest of all VMs rebooted and runnig - OK
Questions: 1) why all domains down if master domain ( on replica "A" ) has two runnig members ( 2 of 3 ) ?? 2) how to fix that colaps without waiting to all nodes up ? ( in worste case if node has HW error eg. ) ?? 3) which oVirt cluster policy can prevent that situation ?? ( if any )
regs. Pavel
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org <mailto:Users@ovirt.org> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
--------------010603000305050305060402 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit <html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <br> <br> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/31/2016 06:41 PM, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz">paf1@email.cz</a> wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote cite="mid:56FD221F.30707@email.cz" type="cite"> <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv="Content-Type"> Hi, <br> rest of logs:<br> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.uschovna.cz/en/zasilka/HYGXR57CNHM3TP39-L3W" style="text-decoration:none;color:#ff9c00;">www.uschovna.cz/en/zasilka/HYGXR57CNHM3TP39-L3W</a><br> <br> The TEST is the last big event in logs ....<br> TEST TIME : about 14:00-14:30 CET<br> </blockquote> <br> Thank you Pavel for the interesting test report and sharing the logs.<br> <br> You are right - the master domain should not go down if 2 of 3 bricks are available from volume A (1HP12-R3A1P1).<br> <br> I notice that host kvmarbiter was not responsive at 2016-03-31 13:27:19 , but the ConnectStorageServerVDSCommand executed on kvmarbiter node returned success at 2016-03-31 13:27:26<br> <br> Could you also share the vdsm logs from 1hp1, 1hp2 and kvmarbiter nodes during this time ?<br> <br> Ravi, Krutika - could you take a look at the gluster logs? <br> <br> <blockquote cite="mid:56FD221F.30707@email.cz" type="cite"> <br> regs.Pavel<br> <br> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 31.3.2016 14:30, Yaniv Kaul wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote cite="mid:CAJgorsaOUQ_42GUSPh-H1vGUgJ114JYcUHR8vHwvmcWR+w8Jmw@mail.gmail.com" type="cite"> <div dir="ltr">Hi Pavel, <div><br> </div> <div>Thanks for the report. Can you begin with a more accurate description of your environment?</div> <div>Begin with host, oVirt and Gluster versions. Then continue with the exact setup (what are 'A', 'B', 'C' - domains? Volumes? What is the mapping between domains and volumes?).</div> <div><br> </div> <div>Are there any logs you can share with us?</div> <div><br> </div> <div>I'm sure with more information, we'd be happy to look at the issue.</div> <div>Y.</div> <div><br> </div> </div> <div class="gmail_extra"><br> <div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:09 PM, <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz">paf1@email.cz</a></a> <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz" target="_blank">paf1@email.cz</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <div text="#000066" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> Hello, <br> we tried the following test - with unwanted results<br> <br> input:<br> 5 node gluster<br> A = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node1+node2+arbiter on node 5 )<br> B = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node3+node4+arbiter on node 5 )<br> C = distributed replica 3 arbiter 1 ( node1+node2, node3+node4, each arbiter on node 5)<br> node 5 has only arbiter replica ( 4x )<br> <br> TEST:<br> 1) directly reboot one node - OK ( is not important which ( data node or arbiter node ))<br> 2) directly reboot two nodes - OK ( if nodes are not from the same replica ) <br> 3) directly reboot three nodes - yes, this is the main problem and a questions ....<br> - rebooted all three nodes from replica "B" ( not so possible, but who knows ... )<br> - all VMs with data on this replica was paused ( no data access ) - OK<br> - all VMs running on replica "B" nodes lost ( started manually, later )( datas on other replicas ) - acceptable<br> BUT<br> - !!! all oVIrt domains went down !! - master domain is on replica "A" which lost only one member from three !!!<br> so we are not expecting that all domain will go down, especially master with 2 live members.<br> <br> Results: <br> - the whole cluster unreachable until at all domains up - depent of all nodes up !!!<br> - all paused VMs started back - OK<br> - rest of all VMs rebooted and runnig - OK<br> <br> Questions:<br> 1) why all domains down if master domain ( on replica "A" ) has two runnig members ( 2 of 3 ) ??<br> 2) how to fix that colaps without waiting to all nodes up ? ( in worste case if node has HW error eg. ) ??<br> 3) which oVirt cluster policy can prevent that situation ?? ( if any )<br> <br> regs.<br> Pavel<br> <br> <br> </div> <br> _______________________________________________<br> Users mailing list<br> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Users@ovirt.org">Users@ovirt.org</a><br> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br> <br> </blockquote> </div> <br> </div> </blockquote> <br> <br> <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset> <br> <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________ Users mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Users@ovirt.org">Users@ovirt.org</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users">http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users</a> </pre> </blockquote> <br> </body> </html> --------------010603000305050305060402--

Hello Sahina, look attached logs which U requested regs. Pavel On 5.4.2016 14:07, Sahina Bose wrote:
On 03/31/2016 06:41 PM, paf1@email.cz wrote:
Hi, rest of logs: www.uschovna.cz/en/zasilka/HYGXR57CNHM3TP39-L3W <http://www.uschovna.cz/en/zasilka/HYGXR57CNHM3TP39-L3W>
The TEST is the last big event in logs .... TEST TIME : about 14:00-14:30 CET
Thank you Pavel for the interesting test report and sharing the logs.
You are right - the master domain should not go down if 2 of 3 bricks are available from volume A (1HP12-R3A1P1).
I notice that host kvmarbiter was not responsive at 2016-03-31 13:27:19 , but the ConnectStorageServerVDSCommand executed on kvmarbiter node returned success at 2016-03-31 13:27:26
Could you also share the vdsm logs from 1hp1, 1hp2 and kvmarbiter nodes during this time ?
Ravi, Krutika - could you take a look at the gluster logs?
regs.Pavel
On 31.3.2016 14:30, Yaniv Kaul wrote:
Hi Pavel,
Thanks for the report. Can you begin with a more accurate description of your environment? Begin with host, oVirt and Gluster versions. Then continue with the exact setup (what are 'A', 'B', 'C' - domains? Volumes? What is the mapping between domains and volumes?).
Are there any logs you can share with us?
I'm sure with more information, we'd be happy to look at the issue. Y.
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:09 PM, paf1@email.cz <paf1@email.cz <mailto:paf1@email.cz>> wrote:
Hello, we tried the following test - with unwanted results
input: 5 node gluster A = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node1+node2+arbiter on node 5 ) B = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node3+node4+arbiter on node 5 ) C = distributed replica 3 arbiter 1 ( node1+node2, node3+node4, each arbiter on node 5) node 5 has only arbiter replica ( 4x )
TEST: 1) directly reboot one node - OK ( is not important which ( data node or arbiter node )) 2) directly reboot two nodes - OK ( if nodes are not from the same replica ) 3) directly reboot three nodes - yes, this is the main problem and a questions .... - rebooted all three nodes from replica "B" ( not so possible, but who knows ... ) - all VMs with data on this replica was paused ( no data access ) - OK - all VMs running on replica "B" nodes lost ( started manually, later )( datas on other replicas ) - acceptable BUT - !!! all oVIrt domains went down !! - master domain is on replica "A" which lost only one member from three !!! so we are not expecting that all domain will go down, especially master with 2 live members.
Results: - the whole cluster unreachable until at all domains up - depent of all nodes up !!! - all paused VMs started back - OK - rest of all VMs rebooted and runnig - OK
Questions: 1) why all domains down if master domain ( on replica "A" ) has two runnig members ( 2 of 3 ) ?? 2) how to fix that colaps without waiting to all nodes up ? ( in worste case if node has HW error eg. ) ?? 3) which oVirt cluster policy can prevent that situation ?? ( if any )
regs. Pavel
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org <mailto:Users@ovirt.org> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users

This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070804060902090506040505 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit So I looked at the vdsm logs and since there were multiple tests done it was difficult to isolate which error to track down. You mentioned test between 14:00-14:30 CET - but the gluster logs that were attached ended at 11.29 UTC Tracking down the errors when the master domain (gluster volume 1HP12-R3A1P1) went inactive for time period when corresponding gluster volume log was available - they all seem to correspond to an issue where gluster volume quorum was not met. Can you confirm if this was for the test performed - or provide logs from correct time period (both vdsm and gluster mount logs are required - from hypervisors where the master domain is mounted)? For master domain: On 1hp1: vdsm.log Thread-35::ERROR::2016-03-31 13:21:27,225::monitor::276::Storage.Monitor::(_monitorDomain) Err or monitoring domain 14995860-1127-4dc4-b8c8-b540b89f9313 Traceback (most recent call last): ... File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ioprocess/__init__.py", line 454, in statvfs resdict = self._sendCommand("statvfs", {"path": path}, self.timeout) File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ioprocess/__init__.py", line 427, in _sendCommand raise OSError(errcode, errstr) OSError: [Errno 107] Transport endpoint is not connected Thread-35::INFO::2016-03-31 13:21:27,267::monitor::299::Storage.Monitor::(_notifyStatusChanges) Domain 14995860-1127-4dc4-b8c8-b540b89f9313 became INVALID -- And I see a corresponding: [2016-03-31 11:21:16.027090] W [MSGID: 108001] [afr-common.c:4093:afr_notify] 0-1HP12-R3A1P1-r eplicate-0: Client-quorum is not met jsonrpc.Executor/0::DEBUG::2016-03-31 13:23:34,110::__init__::533::jsonrpc.JsonRpcServer::(_serveRequest) Return 'GlusterVolume.status' in bridge with {'volumeStatus': {'bricks': [{'status': 'OFFLINE', 'hostuuid': 'f6568a3b-3d65-4f4f-be9f-14a5935e37a4', 'pid': '-1', 'rdma_port': 'N/A', 'brick': '1hp1:/STORAGES/P1/GFS', 'port': 'N/A'}, {'status': 'OFFLINE', 'hostuuid': '8e87cf18-8958-41b7-8d24-7ee420a1ef9f', 'pid': '-1', 'rdma_port': 'N/A', 'brick': '1hp2:/STORAGES/P1/GFS', 'port': 'N/A'}], 'nfs': [{'status': 'OFFLINE', 'hostuuid': 'f6568a3b-3d65-4f4f-be9f-14a5935e37a4', 'hostname': '172.16.5.151/24', 'pid': '-1', 'rdma_port': 'N/A', 'port': 'N/A'}, {'status': 'OFFLINE', 'hostuuid': '8e87cf18-8958-41b7-8d24-7ee420a1ef9f', 'hostname': '1hp2', 'pid': '-1', 'rdma_port': 'N/A', 'port': 'N/A'}], 'shd': [{'status': 'ONLINE', 'hostname': '172.16.5.151/24', 'pid': '2148', 'hostuuid': 'f6568a3b-3d65-4f4f-be9f-14a5935e37a4'}, {'status': 'ONLINE', 'hostname': '1hp2', 'pid': '2146', 'hostuuid': '8e87cf18-8958-41b7-8d24-7ee420a1ef9f'}], 'name': '1HP12-R3A1P1'}} -- 2 bricks were offline. I think the arbiter brick is not reported in the xml output - this is a bug. Similarly on 1hp2: Thread-35::ERROR::2016-03-31 13:21:14,284::monitor::276::Storage.Monitor::(_monitorDomain) Err or monitoring domain 14995860-1127-4dc4-b8c8-b540b89f9313 Traceback (most recent call last): ... raise OSError(errcode, errstr) OSError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory Thread-35::INFO::2016-03-31 13:21:14,285::monitor::299::Storage.Monitor::(_notifyStatusChanges) Domain 14995860-1127-4dc4-b8c8-b540b89f9313 became INVALID Corresponding gluster mount log - [2016-03-31 11:21:16.027640] W [MSGID: 108001] [afr-common.c:4093:afr_notify] 0-1HP12-R3A1P1-r eplicate-0: Client-quorum is not met On 04/05/2016 07:02 PM, paf1@email.cz wrote:
Hello Sahina, look attached logs which U requested
regs. Pavel
On 5.4.2016 14:07, Sahina Bose wrote:
On 03/31/2016 06:41 PM, paf1@email.cz wrote:
Hi, rest of logs: www.uschovna.cz/en/zasilka/HYGXR57CNHM3TP39-L3W <http://www.uschovna.cz/en/zasilka/HYGXR57CNHM3TP39-L3W>
The TEST is the last big event in logs .... TEST TIME : about 14:00-14:30 CET
Thank you Pavel for the interesting test report and sharing the logs.
You are right - the master domain should not go down if 2 of 3 bricks are available from volume A (1HP12-R3A1P1).
I notice that host kvmarbiter was not responsive at 2016-03-31 13:27:19 , but the ConnectStorageServerVDSCommand executed on kvmarbiter node returned success at 2016-03-31 13:27:26
Could you also share the vdsm logs from 1hp1, 1hp2 and kvmarbiter nodes during this time ?
Ravi, Krutika - could you take a look at the gluster logs?
regs.Pavel
On 31.3.2016 14:30, Yaniv Kaul wrote:
Hi Pavel,
Thanks for the report. Can you begin with a more accurate description of your environment? Begin with host, oVirt and Gluster versions. Then continue with the exact setup (what are 'A', 'B', 'C' - domains? Volumes? What is the mapping between domains and volumes?).
Are there any logs you can share with us?
I'm sure with more information, we'd be happy to look at the issue. Y.
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:09 PM, paf1@email.cz <paf1@email.cz <mailto:paf1@email.cz>> wrote:
Hello, we tried the following test - with unwanted results
input: 5 node gluster A = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node1+node2+arbiter on node 5 ) B = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node3+node4+arbiter on node 5 ) C = distributed replica 3 arbiter 1 ( node1+node2, node3+node4, each arbiter on node 5) node 5 has only arbiter replica ( 4x )
TEST: 1) directly reboot one node - OK ( is not important which ( data node or arbiter node )) 2) directly reboot two nodes - OK ( if nodes are not from the same replica ) 3) directly reboot three nodes - yes, this is the main problem and a questions .... - rebooted all three nodes from replica "B" ( not so possible, but who knows ... ) - all VMs with data on this replica was paused ( no data access ) - OK - all VMs running on replica "B" nodes lost ( started manually, later )( datas on other replicas ) - acceptable BUT - !!! all oVIrt domains went down !! - master domain is on replica "A" which lost only one member from three !!! so we are not expecting that all domain will go down, especially master with 2 live members.
Results: - the whole cluster unreachable until at all domains up - depent of all nodes up !!! - all paused VMs started back - OK - rest of all VMs rebooted and runnig - OK
Questions: 1) why all domains down if master domain ( on replica "A" ) has two runnig members ( 2 of 3 ) ?? 2) how to fix that colaps without waiting to all nodes up ? ( in worste case if node has HW error eg. ) ?? 3) which oVirt cluster policy can prevent that situation ?? ( if any )
regs. Pavel
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org <mailto:Users@ovirt.org> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
--------------070804060902090506040505 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit <html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> So I looked at the vdsm logs and since there were multiple tests done it was difficult to isolate which error to track down. You mentioned test between 14:00-14:30 CET - but the gluster logs that were attached ended at 11.29 UTC<br> <br> Tracking down the errors when the master domain (gluster volume 1HP12-R3A1P1) went inactive for time period when corresponding gluster volume log was available - they all seem to correspond to an issue where gluster volume quorum was not met.<br> <br> Can you confirm if this was for the test performed - or provide logs from correct time period (both vdsm and gluster mount logs are required - from hypervisors where the master domain is mounted)?<br> <br> For master domain:<br> On 1hp1:<br> vdsm.log<br> Thread-35::ERROR::2016-03-31 13:21:27,225::monitor::276::Storage.Monitor::(_monitorDomain) Err<br> or monitoring domain 14995860-1127-4dc4-b8c8-b540b89f9313<br> Traceback (most recent call last):<br> ...<br> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ioprocess/__init__.py", line 454, in statvfs<br> resdict = self._sendCommand("statvfs", {"path": path}, self.timeout)<br> File "/usr/lib/python2.7/site-packages/ioprocess/__init__.py", line 427, in _sendCommand<br> raise OSError(errcode, errstr)<br> OSError: [Errno 107] Transport endpoint is not connected<br> Thread-35::<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="INFO::2016-03-31">INFO::2016-03-31</a> 13:21:27,267::monitor::299::Storage.Monitor::(_notifyStatusChanges) Domain 14995860-1127-4dc4-b8c8-b540b89f9313 became INVALID<br> <br> -- And I see a corresponding:<br> [2016-03-31 11:21:16.027090] W [MSGID: 108001] [afr-common.c:4093:afr_notify] 0-1HP12-R3A1P1-r<br> eplicate-0: Client-quorum is not met<br> <br> jsonrpc.Executor/0::DEBUG::2016-03-31 13:23:34,110::__init__::533::jsonrpc.JsonRpcServer::(_serveRequest) Return 'GlusterVolume.status' in bridge with {'volumeStatus': {'bricks': [{'status': 'OFFLINE', 'hostuuid': 'f6568a3b-3d65-4f4f-be9f-14a5935e37a4', 'pid': '-1', 'rdma_port': 'N/A', 'brick': '1hp1:/STORAGES/P1/GFS', 'port': 'N/A'}, {'status': 'OFFLINE', 'hostuuid': '8e87cf18-8958-41b7-8d24-7ee420a1ef9f', 'pid': '-1', 'rdma_port': 'N/A', 'brick': '1hp2:/STORAGES/P1/GFS', 'port': 'N/A'}], 'nfs': [{'status': 'OFFLINE', 'hostuuid': 'f6568a3b-3d65-4f4f-be9f-14a5935e37a4', 'hostname': '172.16.5.151/24', 'pid': '-1', 'rdma_port': 'N/A', 'port': 'N/A'}, {'status': 'OFFLINE', 'hostuuid': '8e87cf18-8958-41b7-8d24-7ee420a1ef9f', 'hostname': '1hp2', 'pid': '-1', 'rdma_port': 'N/A', 'port': 'N/A'}], 'shd': [{'status': 'ONLINE', 'hostname': '172.16.5.151/24', 'pid': '2148', 'hostuuid': 'f6568a3b-3d65-4f4f-be9f-14a5935e37a4'}, {'status': 'ONLINE', 'hostname': '1hp2', 'pid': '2146', 'hostuuid': '8e87cf18-8958-41b7-8d24-7ee420a1ef9f'}], 'name': '1HP12-R3A1P1'}}<br> <br> -- 2 bricks were offline. I think the arbiter brick is not reported in the xml output - this is a bug.<br> <br> Similarly on 1hp2:<br> Thread-35::ERROR::2016-03-31 13:21:14,284::monitor::276::Storage.Monitor::(_monitorDomain) Err<br> or monitoring domain 14995860-1127-4dc4-b8c8-b540b89f9313<br> Traceback (most recent call last):<br> ...<br> raise OSError(errcode, errstr)<br> OSError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory<br> Thread-35::<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="INFO::2016-03-31">INFO::2016-03-31</a> 13:21:14,285::monitor::299::Storage.Monitor::(_notifyStatusChanges) Domain 14995860-1127-4dc4-b8c8-b540b89f9313 became INVALID<br> <br> Corresponding gluster mount log - <br> [2016-03-31 11:21:16.027640] W [MSGID: 108001] [afr-common.c:4093:afr_notify] 0-1HP12-R3A1P1-r<br> eplicate-0: Client-quorum is not met<br> <br> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 04/05/2016 07:02 PM, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz">paf1@email.cz</a> wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote cite="mid:5703BE74.1050408@email.cz" type="cite"> <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv="Content-Type"> Hello Sahina, <br> look attached logs which U requested<br> <br> regs.<br> Pavel<br> <br> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5.4.2016 14:07, Sahina Bose wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote cite="mid:5703AA9D.40303@redhat.com" type="cite"> <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv="Content-Type"> <br> <br> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/31/2016 06:41 PM, <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz"><a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz">paf1@email.cz</a></a> wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote cite="mid:56FD221F.30707@email.cz" type="cite"> <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv="Content-Type"> Hi, <br> rest of logs:<br> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.uschovna.cz/en/zasilka/HYGXR57CNHM3TP39-L3W" style="text-decoration:none;color:#ff9c00;">www.uschovna.cz/en/zasilka/HYGXR57CNHM3TP39-L3W</a><br> <br> The TEST is the last big event in logs ....<br> TEST TIME : about 14:00-14:30 CET<br> </blockquote> <br> Thank you Pavel for the interesting test report and sharing the logs.<br> <br> You are right - the master domain should not go down if 2 of 3 bricks are available from volume A (1HP12-R3A1P1).<br> <br> I notice that host kvmarbiter was not responsive at 2016-03-31 13:27:19 , but the ConnectStorageServerVDSCommand executed on kvmarbiter node returned success at 2016-03-31 13:27:26<br> <br> Could you also share the vdsm logs from 1hp1, 1hp2 and kvmarbiter nodes during this time ?<br> <br> Ravi, Krutika - could you take a look at the gluster logs? <br> <br> <blockquote cite="mid:56FD221F.30707@email.cz" type="cite"> <br> regs.Pavel<br> <br> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 31.3.2016 14:30, Yaniv Kaul wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote cite="mid:CAJgorsaOUQ_42GUSPh-H1vGUgJ114JYcUHR8vHwvmcWR+w8Jmw@mail.gmail.com" type="cite"> <div dir="ltr">Hi Pavel, <div><br> </div> <div>Thanks for the report. Can you begin with a more accurate description of your environment?</div> <div>Begin with host, oVirt and Gluster versions. Then continue with the exact setup (what are 'A', 'B', 'C' - domains? Volumes? What is the mapping between domains and volumes?).</div> <div><br> </div> <div>Are there any logs you can share with us?</div> <div><br> </div> <div>I'm sure with more information, we'd be happy to look at the issue.</div> <div>Y.</div> <div><br> </div> </div> <div class="gmail_extra"><br> <div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:09 PM, <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz">paf1@email.cz</a> <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz" target="_blank">paf1@email.cz</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <div text="#000066" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> Hello, <br> we tried the following test - with unwanted results<br> <br> input:<br> 5 node gluster<br> A = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node1+node2+arbiter on node 5 )<br> B = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node3+node4+arbiter on node 5 )<br> C = distributed replica 3 arbiter 1 ( node1+node2, node3+node4, each arbiter on node 5)<br> node 5 has only arbiter replica ( 4x )<br> <br> TEST:<br> 1) directly reboot one node - OK ( is not important which ( data node or arbiter node ))<br> 2) directly reboot two nodes - OK ( if nodes are not from the same replica ) <br> 3) directly reboot three nodes - yes, this is the main problem and a questions ....<br> - rebooted all three nodes from replica "B" ( not so possible, but who knows ... )<br> - all VMs with data on this replica was paused ( no data access ) - OK<br> - all VMs running on replica "B" nodes lost ( started manually, later )( datas on other replicas ) - acceptable<br> BUT<br> - !!! all oVIrt domains went down !! - master domain is on replica "A" which lost only one member from three !!!<br> so we are not expecting that all domain will go down, especially master with 2 live members.<br> <br> Results: <br> - the whole cluster unreachable until at all domains up - depent of all nodes up !!!<br> - all paused VMs started back - OK<br> - rest of all VMs rebooted and runnig - OK<br> <br> Questions:<br> 1) why all domains down if master domain ( on replica "A" ) has two runnig members ( 2 of 3 ) ??<br> 2) how to fix that colaps without waiting to all nodes up ? ( in worste case if node has HW error eg. ) ??<br> 3) which oVirt cluster policy can prevent that situation ?? ( if any )<br> <br> regs.<br> Pavel<br> <br> <br> </div> <br> _______________________________________________<br> Users mailing list<br> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Users@ovirt.org">Users@ovirt.org</a><br> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br> <br> </blockquote> </div> <br> </div> </blockquote> <br> <br> <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset> <br> <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________ Users mailing list <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Users@ovirt.org">Users@ovirt.org</a> <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users">http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users</a> </pre> </blockquote> <br> </blockquote> <br> </blockquote> <br> </body> </html> --------------070804060902090506040505--

This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------090201020805060107090008 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hello Yaniv, we tried another small test - reboot two nodes from replica3 a1 ( 1HP12-R3A1P1 ) which keep master domain. All domains went down = master down, but master domain didn't move to another available domain ( eg. 2HP12-R3A1P1 ). It looks that "master domain" management isn't correct ( has a bug ?? ) regs. Pavel On 31.3.2016 14:30, Yaniv Kaul wrote:
Hi Pavel,
Thanks for the report. Can you begin with a more accurate description of your environment? Begin with host, oVirt and Gluster versions. Then continue with the exact setup (what are 'A', 'B', 'C' - domains? Volumes? What is the mapping between domains and volumes?).
Are there any logs you can share with us?
I'm sure with more information, we'd be happy to look at the issue. Y.
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:09 PM, paf1@email.cz <mailto:paf1@email.cz> <paf1@email.cz <mailto:paf1@email.cz>> wrote:
Hello, we tried the following test - with unwanted results
input: 5 node gluster A = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node1+node2+arbiter on node 5 ) B = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node3+node4+arbiter on node 5 ) C = distributed replica 3 arbiter 1 ( node1+node2, node3+node4, each arbiter on node 5) node 5 has only arbiter replica ( 4x )
TEST: 1) directly reboot one node - OK ( is not important which ( data node or arbiter node )) 2) directly reboot two nodes - OK ( if nodes are not from the same replica ) 3) directly reboot three nodes - yes, this is the main problem and a questions .... - rebooted all three nodes from replica "B" ( not so possible, but who knows ... ) - all VMs with data on this replica was paused ( no data access ) - OK - all VMs running on replica "B" nodes lost ( started manually, later )( datas on other replicas ) - acceptable BUT - !!! all oVIrt domains went down !! - master domain is on replica "A" which lost only one member from three !!! so we are not expecting that all domain will go down, especially master with 2 live members.
Results: - the whole cluster unreachable until at all domains up - depent of all nodes up !!! - all paused VMs started back - OK - rest of all VMs rebooted and runnig - OK
Questions: 1) why all domains down if master domain ( on replica "A" ) has two runnig members ( 2 of 3 ) ?? 2) how to fix that colaps without waiting to all nodes up ? ( in worste case if node has HW error eg. ) ?? 3) which oVirt cluster policy can prevent that situation ?? ( if any )
regs. Pavel
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list Users@ovirt.org <mailto:Users@ovirt.org> http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users
--------------090201020805060107090008 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit <html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body text="#000066" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> Hello Yaniv,<br> <br> we tried another small test - reboot two nodes from replica3 a1 ( 1HP12-R3A1P1 ) which keep master domain.<br> All domains went down = master down, but master domain didn't move to another available domain ( eg. 2HP12-R3A1P1 ).<br> <br> It looks that "master domain" management isn't correct ( has a bug ?? )<br> <br> regs.<br> Pavel<br> <br> <br> <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 31.3.2016 14:30, Yaniv Kaul wrote:<br> </div> <blockquote cite="mid:CAJgorsaOUQ_42GUSPh-H1vGUgJ114JYcUHR8vHwvmcWR+w8Jmw@mail.gmail.com" type="cite"> <div dir="ltr">Hi Pavel, <div><br> </div> <div>Thanks for the report. Can you begin with a more accurate description of your environment?</div> <div>Begin with host, oVirt and Gluster versions. Then continue with the exact setup (what are 'A', 'B', 'C' - domains? Volumes? What is the mapping between domains and volumes?).</div> <div><br> </div> <div>Are there any logs you can share with us?</div> <div><br> </div> <div>I'm sure with more information, we'd be happy to look at the issue.</div> <div>Y.</div> <div><br> </div> </div> <div class="gmail_extra"><br> <div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 3:09 PM, <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz">paf1@email.cz</a> <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:paf1@email.cz" target="_blank">paf1@email.cz</a>></span> wrote:<br> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <div text="#000066" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> Hello, <br> we tried the following test - with unwanted results<br> <br> input:<br> 5 node gluster<br> A = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node1+node2+arbiter on node 5 )<br> B = replica 3 with arbiter 1 ( node3+node4+arbiter on node 5 )<br> C = distributed replica 3 arbiter 1 ( node1+node2, node3+node4, each arbiter on node 5)<br> node 5 has only arbiter replica ( 4x )<br> <br> TEST:<br> 1) directly reboot one node - OK ( is not important which ( data node or arbiter node ))<br> 2) directly reboot two nodes - OK ( if nodes are not from the same replica ) <br> 3) directly reboot three nodes - yes, this is the main problem and a questions ....<br> - rebooted all three nodes from replica "B" ( not so possible, but who knows ... )<br> - all VMs with data on this replica was paused ( no data access ) - OK<br> - all VMs running on replica "B" nodes lost ( started manually, later )( datas on other replicas ) - acceptable<br> BUT<br> - !!! all oVIrt domains went down !! - master domain is on replica "A" which lost only one member from three !!!<br> so we are not expecting that all domain will go down, especially master with 2 live members.<br> <br> Results: <br> - the whole cluster unreachable until at all domains up - depent of all nodes up !!!<br> - all paused VMs started back - OK<br> - rest of all VMs rebooted and runnig - OK<br> <br> Questions:<br> 1) why all domains down if master domain ( on replica "A" ) has two runnig members ( 2 of 3 ) ??<br> 2) how to fix that colaps without waiting to all nodes up ? ( in worste case if node has HW error eg. ) ??<br> 3) which oVirt cluster policy can prevent that situation ?? ( if any )<br> <br> regs.<br> Pavel<br> <br> <br> </div> <br> _______________________________________________<br> Users mailing list<br> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Users@ovirt.org">Users@ovirt.org</a><br> <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users</a><br> <br> </blockquote> </div> <br> </div> </blockquote> <br> </body> </html> --------------090201020805060107090008--
participants (3)
-
paf1@email.cz
-
Sahina Bose
-
Yaniv Kaul