I cannot speak to an interim version. I went from 3.6.x to 3.7.x a
long time ago and it was a disaster. Many samba crashes and core dumps
scared me so I rolled back to 3.6.x series and stayed there until I
upgraded to 3.10.2

I never tried 3.8.x so I cannot speak to it, other than knowing is
what Red Hat considers stable on their supported RHEL OS.

Diego

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Brett Randall <brett.rand...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Diego. This is invaluable information, appreciate it immensely. I had
> heard previously that you can always go back to previous Gluster binaries,
> but without understanding the data structures behind Gluster, I had no idea
> how safe that was. Backing up the lib folder makes perfect sense.
>
> The performance issues we're specifically keen to address are the small-file
> performance improvements introduced in 3.7. I feel that a lot of the
> complaints we get are from people using apps that are {slowly} crawling
> massively deep folders via SMB. I'm hoping that the improvements made in 3.7
> have stayed intact in 3.10! Otherwise, is there a generally accepted "fast
> and stable" version earlier than 3.10 that we should be looking at as an
> interim step?
>
> Brett
>
> ________________________________
> From: Diego Remolina <dijur...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 10:39:27 PM
> To: Brett Randall
> Cc: gluster-users@gluster.org List
> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] Upgrading from 3.6.3 to 3.10/3.11
>
> I had a mixed experience going from 3.6.6 to 3.10.2 on a two server
> setup. I have since upgraded to 3.10.3 but I still have a bad problem
> with specific files (see CONS below).
>
> PROS
> - Back on a "supported" version.
> - Windows roaming profiles (small file performance) improved
> significantly via samba. This may be due to new tuning options added
> (see my tuning options for the volume below):
> Volume Name: export
> Type: Replicate
> Volume ID: ---snip---
> Status: Started
> Snapshot Count: 0
> Number of Bricks: 1 x 2 = 2
> Transport-type: tcp
> Bricks:
> Brick1: 10.0.1.7:/bricks/hdds/brick
> Brick2: 10.0.1.6:/bricks/hdds/brick
> Options Reconfigured:
> performance.stat-prefetch: on
> performance.cache-min-file-size: 0
> network.inode-lru-limit: 65536
> performance.cache-invalidation: on
> features.cache-invalidation: on
> performance.md-cache-timeout: 600
> features.cache-invalidation-timeout: 600
> performance.cache-samba-metadata: on
> transport.address-family: inet
> server.allow-insecure: on
> performance.cache-size: 10GB
> cluster.server-quorum-type: server
> nfs.disable: on
> performance.io-thread-count: 64
> performance.io-cache: on
> cluster.lookup-optimize: on
> cluster.readdir-optimize: on
> server.event-threads: 5
> client.event-threads: 5
> performance.cache-max-file-size: 256MB
> diagnostics.client-log-level: INFO
> diagnostics.brick-log-level: INFO
> cluster.server-quorum-ratio: 51%
>
> CONS
> - New problems came up with specific files (Autodesk Revit files) for
> which no solution has been found, other than stop using samba vfs
> gluster plugin and also doing some stupid file renaming game. See:
> http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2017-June/031377.html
> - With 3.6.6 I had a nightly rsync process that would copy all the
> data from the gluster server pair to another server (nightly backup).
> This operation used to finish between 1-2AM every day. After upgrade,
> this operation is much slower with rsync finishing up between 3-5AM.
> - I have not looked a lot into it, but after 40-ish days after the
> upgrade, the gluster mount in one server became stuck and I had to
> reboot the servers.
>
> As for recommendations, definitively do *not* go with 3.11 as that is
> *not* a long term release. Stay with 3.10.
> https://www.gluster.org/community/release-schedule/
>
> Make sure you have the 3.6.3 rpms available to downgrade if needed.
> You can always go back to the previous rpms if you have them available
> (this is not easy if you have a mix with other distros, i.e ubuntu,
> where the ppa only have the latest .deb file for each minor version).
>
> You must schedule downtime and bring the whole gluster down for the
> upgrade. Upgrade all servers, then clients then test, test, test and
> test more (I did not notice my Revit file problem until users brought
> it to my attention). If things are going well in your testing, then
> you should do the op version upgrade, but not before committing to
> staying with 3.10. It is truth you can lower the op version later
> manually, but then you have to manually edit several files on each
> server, so I say, stay with the *older* op version until you are sure
> you want to stay on 3.10 then upgrade the op version.
>
> https://gluster.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Upgrade-Guide/op_version/
>
> Prior to any changes, backup all your gluster server configuration
> folders ( /var/lib/glusterd/ ) in every single server. That will allow
> you to go back to the moment before upgrade if really needed.
>
> HTH,
>
> Diego
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 6:51 AM, Brett Randall <brett.rand...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> Hi all
>>
>> We have a 20-node, 1pb Gluster deployment that is running 3.6.3 - the same
>> version we installed on day 1. There are obviously numerous performance
>> and
>> feature improvements that we'd like to take advantage of. However, this is
>> a
>> production system and we don't have a replica of it that we can test the
>> upgrade on.
>>
>> We're running CentOS 6.6 with official Gluster binaries. We rely on
>> Gluster's NFS daemon, and also use samba-glusterfs with samba for SMB
>> access
>> to our Gluster volume.
>>
>> What risks might we face with an upgrade from 3.6 to 3.10/3.11? And what
>> rollback options do we have?
>>
>> More importantly, is there anyone who would be willing to work for a
>> retainer plus worked hours to be "on call" in case we have problems during
>> the upgrade? Someone with plenty of experience in Gluster over the years
>> and
>> could diagnose any issues we may experience in an upgrade. If you're
>> interested, please e-mail me off-list. I'm, of course, interested in
>> advice
>> on-list as well.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Brett.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Gluster-users mailing list
>> Gluster-users@gluster.org
>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
_______________________________________________
Gluster-users mailing list
Gluster-users@gluster.org
http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users

Reply via email to