On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 01:43:29PM +0530, Avra Sengupta wrote:
> Problem: glusterd used to assume that the brick port which was previously
> allocated to a brick, would still be available, and in doing so would reuse
> the port for the brick without registering with the port map server. The
> port map server would not be aware of the brick reusing the same port, and
> try to allocate it to another process, and in turn result in that process'
> failure to connect to the port.
> 
> Fix and port usage changes: With the fix, we force glusterd, to unregister a
> port previously used by the brick, and register a new port with the port map
> server and then use it. As a result of this change, there will be no
> conflict between processes competing over the same port, thereby fixing the
> issue. Also because of this change, a brick process on restart is not
> guaranteed to reuse the same port it used to be connected to. Client processes
> are unaffected by this change, as they do a portmap query before connecting to
> the brick processes.

Great, thanks!

Niels

> 
> 
> On 09/19/2016 01:25 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 12:56:10PM +0530, Avra Sengupta wrote:
> > > On 09/07/2016 08:33 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > > > Hi Avra,
> > > > 
> > > > http://review.gluster.org/15308 is one of your patches, and this changes
> > > > the allocation of ports used. It seems to address a real problem, so it
> > > > is acceptible to include it in 3.8.
> > > > 
> > > > Because it is a user facing change (different ports), we need to mention
> > > > the difference in behaviour in the release notes. Could you provide me
> > > > with a suitable text that includes the problem being addressed, and how
> > > > the usage of ports differs from before?
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Niels
> > > Hi Niels,
> > > 
> > > Please find below the text to address the problem and the change in 
> > > behavior
> > > now.
> > > 
> > > Problem: glusterd used to assume that the brick port which was previously
> > > allocated to a brick, would still be available, and in doing so would 
> > > reuse
> > > the port for the brick without registering with the port map server. The
> > > port map server would not be aware of the brick reusing the same port, and
> > > try to allocate it to another process, and in turn result in that process'
> > > failure to connect to the port.
> > > 
> > > Fix and port usage changes: With the fix, we force glusterd, to 
> > > unregister a
> > > port previously used by the brick, and register a new port with the port 
> > > map
> > > server and then use it. As a result of this change, there will be no
> > > conflict between processes competing over the same port, thereby fixing 
> > > the
> > > issue. Also because of this change, a brick process on restart is not
> > > guaranteed to reuse the same port it used to be connected to.
> > Thanks Avra, this looks good to me. Could you add a line about how
> > clients do not get confisde by this?
> > 
> > Niels
> 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
maintainers mailing list
maintainers@gluster.org
http://www.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/maintainers

Reply via email to