On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Dmitry Melekhov <[email protected]> wrote:
> 13.07.2016 08:56, Pranith Kumar Karampuri пишет: > > > > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Dmitry Melekhov < <[email protected]> > [email protected]> wrote: > >> 13.07.2016 08:46, Pranith Kumar Karampuri пишет: >> >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:10 AM, Dmitry Melekhov < <[email protected]> >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> 13.07.2016 08:36, Pranith Kumar Karampuri пишет: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 9:35 AM, Dmitry Melekhov < <[email protected]> >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> 13.07.2016 01:52, Anuradha Talur пишет: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>> >>>>>> From: "Dmitry Melekhov" < <[email protected]>[email protected]> >>>>>> To: "Pranith Kumar Karampuri" < <[email protected]> >>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>> Cc: "gluster-users" < <[email protected]> >>>>>> [email protected]> >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2016 9:27:17 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] 3.7.13, index healing broken? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 12.07.2016 17:39, Pranith Kumar Karampuri пишет: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Wow, what are the steps to recreate the problem? >>>>>> >>>>>> just set file length to zero, always reproducible. >>>>>> >>>>>> If you are setting the file length to 0 on one of the bricks (looks >>>>> like >>>>> that is the case), it is not a bug. >>>>> >>>>> Index heal relies on failures seen from the mount point(s) >>>>> to identify the files that need heal. It won't be able to recognize >>>>> any file >>>>> modification done directly on bricks. Same goes for heal info command >>>>> which >>>>> is the reason heal info also shows 0 entries. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Well, this makes self-heal useless then- if any file is accidently >>>> corrupted or deleted (yes! if file is deleted directly from brick this is >>>> no recognized by idex heal too), then it will not be self-healed, because >>>> self-heal uses index heal. >>>> >>> >>> It is better to look into bit-rot feature if you want to guard against >>> these kinds of problems. >>> >>> >>> Bit rot detects bit problems, not missing files or their wrong length, >>> i.e. this is overhead for such simple task. >>> >> >> It detects wrong length. Because checksum won't match anymore. >> >> >> Yes, sure. I guess that it will detect missed files too. But it needs far >> more resources, then just comparing directories in bricks? >> >> >> What use-case you are trying out is leading to changing things directly >> on the brick? >> >> I'm trying to test gluster failure tolerance and right now I'm not happy >> with it... >> > > Which cases of fault tolerance are you not happy with? Making changes > directly on the brick or anything else as well? > > I'll repeat: > As I already said- if I for some reason ( real case can be only by > accident ) will delete file this will not be detected by self-heal daemon, > and, thus, will lead to lower replication level, i.e. lower failure > tolerance. > To prevent such accidents you need to set selinux policies so that files under the brick are not modified by accident by any user. At least that is the solution I remember when this was discussed 3-4 years back. -- Pranith
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
