On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 12:53 PM, Joe Julian wrote:
> Thinking about it more, I'd still rather have this functionality exposed at
> the client through xattrs. For 5 years I've thought about this, and the more
> I encounter split-brain, the more I think this is the needed approach.
>
> "getfattr -n
Thinking about it more, I'd still rather have this functionality exposed
at the client through xattrs. For 5 years I've thought about this, and
the more I encounter split-brain, the more I think this is the needed
approach.
"getfattr -n trusted.glusterfs.stat" returns
xml/json/some_madeup_dat
> Wait, directories *are* supposed to automatically heal from split-brain?
> Guess I need to file a bug report. That doesn't happen. All the metadata and
> gfid can be the same, but since the trusted.afr are both dirty, it'll stay
> split-brain forever.
Conservative merge happens, but 'directories
On 08/07/2014 03:08 AM, Niels de Vos wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 03:17:11PM +0530, Ravishankar N wrote:
On 08/07/2014 03:06 PM, Niels de Vos wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 02:05:34PM +0530, Ravishankar N wrote:
Manual resolution of split-brains [1] has been a tedious task
involving underst
>> seems like automake wants to fix this in their own codebase.
>
> Feel free to do that. In the meantime, what's the best approach
> for us to fix this warning? Can we just ignore it? (no idea
> personally)
>
Yes ignore it, it cannot be fixed properly. There are gazillion
packages which have th
>
>
> While we could extend the existing heal command, we also need to provide a
> policy flag. Entering "y/n" for 1000 files does not make the process any
> easier.
>
What i meant was not a solution just to give you suggestions, of
course there should be improvements on that too. Look at e2fsck o
Isn't that what the discussion tab is for?
On 08/08/2014 10:20 AM, Krishnan Parthasarathi wrote:
Venky,
Could you share this document via Google docs? It would make it
convenient to provide feedback via comments.
~KP
- Original Message -
Hi folks,
Continuing the discussion on bitrot
- Original Message -
> subdir-objects is a terrible option,
Ok, why? :)
> seems like automake wants to fix this in their own codebase.
Feel free to do that. In the meantime, what's the best approach
for us to fix this warning? Can we just ignore it? (no idea
personally)
*
> * Seems like it needs this added to Makefile.am, to stop warnings about
> subdirectory objects:
>
> AUTOMAKE_OPTIONS = subdir-objects
>
> Pull request created for that here:
>
> https://github.com/lpabon/cmockery2/pull/11
>
subdir-objects is a terrible option, seems like au
Venky,
Could you share this document via Google docs? It would make it
convenient to provide feedback via comments.
~KP
- Original Message -
> Hi folks,
>
> Continuing the discussion on bitrot detection in GlusterFS[1], I've put up a
> document that explains the approach and details at
Hi All,
GlusterFS 3.6 is still awaiting a few fixes to land - primarily from
afrv2, dht and user serviceable snapshots. Hence the release schedule
for 3.6 has been revised. The updated schedule can be found at [1].
Nightly builds from release-3.6 are now available at [2]. Testing
feedback fo
Hi JM,
With your concept of a GlusterFS distribution, how'd that end up going?
Asking because GlusterFS 3.6 will support OSX as a native fuse client.
So I'm thinking we should make an OSX binary client package that people
can install in order to access GlusterFS servers. Maybe with some
nice UX
- Original Message -
> That remind me I did not commit NetBSD's package for cmockery. I just
> did it.
While we're at it, I'll make a cmockery2 formula for OSX Homebrew. That'll
lead into a Gluster formula for it later on when things are ready. :)
Two thoughts:
* Seems like it needs t
Hi folks,
Continuing the discussion on bitrot detection in GlusterFS[1], I've put up a
document that explains the approach and details at a higher level. The same
would be put up in the feature page (or expand the current page[2]).
Once there is consensus on the approach and what's expected out
On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 01:26:52PM +0200, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
> Niels de Vos wrote:
>
> > > https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=192420
> > Nice! Is there a plan to propose glusterfs as a FreeBSD port too?
>
> That remind me I did not commit NetBSD's package for cmockery. I just
On 08/08/2014 01:09 PM, Harshavardhana wrote:
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Ravishankar N wrote:
Manual resolution of split-brains [1] has been a tedious task involving
understanding and modifying AFR's changelog extended attributes. To simplify
and to an extent automate this task, we are pro
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 1:35 AM, Ravishankar N wrote:
>
> Manual resolution of split-brains [1] has been a tedious task involving
> understanding and modifying AFR's changelog extended attributes. To simplify
> and to an extent automate this task, we are proposing a new CLI command with
> which the
17 matches
Mail list logo
