On 02/07/2010 02:00 AM, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
Hi, Jeff& Colin:
It looks like you broke something in CLD, not sure if server or client.
There are two possibly related bugs. But first, here's the messages
(The chunkd is run with -D). Note that I have 2 servers listed in DNS
(both on port 4499), but only one is up.
Feb 6 23:36:10 hitlain cld[1934]: databases up
Feb 6 23:36:10 hitlain cld[1934]: Listening on :: port 4499
Feb 6 23:36:10 hitlain cld[1934]: initialized: verbose 0
Feb 6 23:37:10 hitlain chunkd[1967]: Verbose debug output enabled
Feb 6 23:37:10 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_saveaddr: found CLD host
hitlain.zaitcev.lan prio 10 weight 50
Feb 6 23:37:10 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_saveaddr: found CLD host
elanor.zaitcev.lan prio 10 weight 50
Feb 6 23:37:10 hitlain chunkd[1968]: Selected CLD host hitlain.zaitcev.lan
port 4499
Feb 6 23:37:10 hitlain chunkd[1968]: Listening on host :: port 8082
Feb 6 23:37:10 hitlain chunkd[1968]: initialized
Feb 6 23:37:10 hitlain chunkd[1968]: New CLD session created, sid
05B521BF4071EBA2
Feb 6 23:37:10 hitlain chunkd[1968]: CLD file "/chunk-default/2" created
Feb 6 23:37:10 hitlain chunkd[1968]: CLD file "/chunk-default/2" written
Feb 6 23:39:45 hitlain chunkd[1968]: Session failed, sid 05B521BF4071EBA2
Feb 6 23:39:45 hitlain chunkd[1968]: Selected CLD host elanor.zaitcev.lan port
4499
Feb 6 23:39:45 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:39:50 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:39:55 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:40:00 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:40:05 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:40:10 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:40:15 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:40:21 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:40:26 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:40:31 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:40:36 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:40:41 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:40:46 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:40:51 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:40:56 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:41:01 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:41:06 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:41:11 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:41:16 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:41:21 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:41:26 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:41:31 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:41:36 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:41:41 hitlain chunkd[1968]: cldc_udp_receive_pkt failed: -111
Feb 6 23:41:46 hitlain chunkd[1968]: New CLD session creation failed: 17
Feb 6 23:41:46 hitlain chunkd[1968]: Session failed, sid 6C5A5E5D4D8F2270
Feb 6 23:41:46 hitlain chunkd[1968]: Selected CLD host hitlain.zaitcev.lan
port 4499
Feb 6 23:41:46 hitlain chunkd[1968]: New CLD session created, sid
4E2A8ED73878F038
Feb 6 23:41:46 hitlain chunkd[1968]: CLD file "/chunk-default/2" created
Feb 6 23:41:46 hitlain chunkd[1968]: CLD lock(/chunk-default/2) failed: 11
So, first regression: session ALWAYS fails, for no reason I can see.
It takes 2 minutes 35 seconds, as you can observe from the "Session failed"
message.
Second regression: locks of failed session are not removed (this is
what code 11 is). Once the original session fails, CLD client cannot
re-acquire the lock, ever, until the daemon is restarted.
Thanks for the report. That is definitely annoying... I wonder if it
is related to the ping_open bug I fixed...
This definitely used work before the XDR, and it only takes 3 minutes
to fail. Do you guys run and use chunkd or you just do "make check" and
consider it done? I thought we talked about having virtually permanent
cells and long-living CLD clients, because this sort of thing keeps
cropping up.
My local one (shamefully not using SRV, like I should) is pretty
outdated, back to the latest released tarballs, since I dislike having
to lose data on upgrade ;-)
Jeff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe hail-devel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html