Any update? On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Amudhan P <[email protected]> wrote:
> any update?. > > why is it marked bad? > > Any way to find out what happened to the file? > > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Amudhan P <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> my volume is distributed disperse volume 8+2 EC. >> file1 and file2 are different files lying in same brick. I am able to >> read the file from mount point without any issue because of EC it reads >> rest of the available blocks in other nodes. >> >> my question is "file1" sha256 value matches bitrot signature value but >> still, it is also marked as bad by scrubber daemon. why is that? >> >> >> >> On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Kotresh Hiremath Ravishankar < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Amudhan, >>> >>> Sorry for the late response as I was busy with other things. You are >>> right bitrot uses sha256 for checksum. >>> If file-1, file-2 are marked bad, the I/O should be errored out with >>> EIO. If that is not happening, we need >>> to look further into it. But what's the file contents of file-1 and >>> file-2 on the replica bricks ? Are they >>> matching ? >>> >>> Thanks and Regards, >>> Kotresh HR >>> >>> On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 4:19 PM, Amudhan P <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> resending mail. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Amudhan P <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> ok, from bitrot code I figured out gluster using sha256 hashing algo. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Now coming to the problem, during scrub run in my cluster some of my >>>>> files were marked as bad in few set of nodes. >>>>> I just wanted to confirm bad file. so, I have used "sha256sum" tool in >>>>> Linux to manually get file hash. >>>>> >>>>> here is the result. >>>>> >>>>> file-1, file-2 marked as bad by scrub and file-3 is healthy. >>>>> >>>>> file-1 sha256 and bitrot signature value matches but still it's been >>>>> marked as bad. >>>>> >>>>> file-2 sha256 and bitrot signature value don't match, could be a >>>>> victim of bitrot or bitflip.file is still readable without any issue and >>>>> no >>>>> errors found in the drive. >>>>> >>>>> file-3 sha256 and bitrot signature matches and healthy. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> file-1 output from >>>>> >>>>> "sha256sum" = "71eada9352b1352aaef0f806d3d56 >>>>> 1768ce2df905ded1668f665e06eca2d0bd4" >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "getfattr -m. -e hex -d " >>>>> # file: file-1 >>>>> trusted.bit-rot.bad-file=0x3100 >>>>> trusted.bit-rot.signature=0x01020000000000000071eada9352b135 >>>>> 2aaef0f806d3d561768ce2df905ded1668f665e06eca2d0bd4 >>>>> trusted.bit-rot.version=0x020000000000000058e4f3b40006793d >>>>> trusted.ec.config=0x0000080a02000200 >>>>> trusted.ec.dirty=0x00000000000000000000000000000000 >>>>> trusted.ec.size=0x0000000718996701 >>>>> trusted.ec.version=0x0000000000038c4c0000000000038c4d >>>>> trusted.gfid=0xf078a24134fe4f9bb953eca8c28dea9a >>>>> >>>>> output scrub log: >>>>> [2017-09-02 13:02:20.311160] A [MSGID: 118023] >>>>> [bit-rot-scrub.c:244:bitd_compare_ckum] 0-qubevaultdr-bit-rot-0: >>>>> CORRUPTION DETECTED: Object /file-1 {Brick: /media/disk16/brick16 | GFID: >>>>> f078a241-34fe-4f9b-b953-eca8c28dea9a} >>>>> [2017-09-02 13:02:20.311579] A [MSGID: 118024] >>>>> [bit-rot-scrub.c:264:bitd_compare_ckum] 0-qubevaultdr-bit-rot-0: >>>>> Marking /file-1 [GFID: f078a241-34fe-4f9b-b953-eca8c28dea9a | Brick: >>>>> /media/disk16/brick16] as corrupted.. >>>>> >>>>> file-2 output from >>>>> >>>>> "sha256sum" = "c41ef9c81faed4f3e6010ea67984c >>>>> 3cfefd842f98ee342939151f9250972dcda" >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "getfattr -m. -e hex -d " >>>>> # file: file-2 >>>>> trusted.bit-rot.bad-file=0x3100 >>>>> trusted.bit-rot.signature=0x0102000000000000009162cb17d4f0be >>>>> e676fcb7830c5286d05b8e8940d14f3d117cb90b7b1defc129 >>>>> trusted.bit-rot.version=0x020000000000000058e4f3b400019bb2 >>>>> trusted.ec.config=0x0000080a02000200 >>>>> trusted.ec.dirty=0x00000000000000000000000000000000 >>>>> trusted.ec.size=0x00000000403433f6 >>>>> trusted.ec.version=0x000000000000201a000000000000201b >>>>> trusted.gfid=0xa50012b0a632477c99232313928d239a >>>>> >>>>> output scrub log: >>>>> [2017-09-02 05:18:14.003156] A [MSGID: 118023] >>>>> [bit-rot-scrub.c:244:bitd_compare_ckum] 0-qubevaultdr-bit-rot-0: >>>>> CORRUPTION DETECTED: Object /file-2 {Brick: /media/disk13/brick13 | GFID: >>>>> a50012b0-a632-477c-9923-2313928d239a} >>>>> [2017-09-02 05:18:14.006629] A [MSGID: 118024] >>>>> [bit-rot-scrub.c:264:bitd_compare_ckum] 0-qubevaultdr-bit-rot-0: >>>>> Marking /file-2 [GFID: a50012b0-a632-477c-9923-2313928d239a | Brick: >>>>> /media/disk13/brick13] as corrupted.. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> file-3 output from >>>>> >>>>> "sha256sum" = "a590735b3c8936cc7ca9835128a19 >>>>> c38a3f79c8fd53fddc031a9349b7e273f27" >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "getfattr -m. -e hex -d " >>>>> # file: file-3 >>>>> trusted.bit-rot.signature=0x010200000000000000a590735b3c8936 >>>>> cc7ca9835128a19c38a3f79c8fd53fddc031a9349b7e273f27 >>>>> trusted.bit-rot.version=0x020000000000000058e4f3b400019bb2 >>>>> trusted.ec.config=0x0000080a02000200 >>>>> trusted.ec.dirty=0x00000000000000000000000000000000 >>>>> trusted.ec.size=0x000000003530fc96 >>>>> trusted.ec.version=0x0000000000001a980000000000001a99 >>>>> trusted.gfid=0x10d8920e42cd42cf9448b8bf3941c192 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> most of the bitrot bad files are in the set of new nodes and data were >>>>> uploaded using gluster 3.10.1. no drive issues are any kind of error msgs >>>>> in logs. >>>>> >>>>> what could be gone wrong? >>>>> >>>>> regards >>>>> Amudhan >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Amudhan P <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I have a file in my brick which was signed by bitrot and latter when >>>>>> running scrub it was marked as bad. >>>>>> >>>>>> Now, I want to verify file again manually. just to clarify my doubt >>>>>> >>>>>> how can I do this? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> regards >>>>>> Amudhan >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Gluster-users mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Thanks and Regards, >>> Kotresh H R >>> >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Gluster-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
