The changes involved in introducing the deep-flatten feature in the Infernalis release resulted in new clone copy-on-write handling. I would suggest retrying with a jewel release client.
On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 6:56 AM, 许雪寒 <xuxue...@360.cn> wrote: > Thanks for your help:-) > > By the way, could you give us some hint why Infernalis and later releases > don't have this problem, please? Thank you. > > -----邮件原件----- > 发件人: Jason Dillaman [mailto:jdill...@redhat.com] > 发送时间: 2017年4月11日 4:30 > 收件人: 许雪寒 > 抄送: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com > 主题: Re: 答复: [ceph-users] 答复: 答复: rbd expord-diff aren't counting AioTruncate > op correctly > > I tested it on Hammer and I can recreate what you are seeing. The good news > is that Infernalis and later releases behave correctly -- they list the range > 1M-4M as dirty. Since Hammer is approaching end-of-life, I wouldn't > realistically expect this to be fixed -- but I did open a tracker ticket to > document it [1]. > > [1] http://tracker.ceph.com/issues/19570 > > On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 4:40 AM, 许雪寒 <xuxue...@360.cn> wrote: >> Oh, sorry again. We didn't resize the image, just "aio_discard"ed the data >> from the offset 1048576 to the end of the rbd image. >> ________________________________________ >> 发件人: 许雪寒 >> 发送时间: 2017年4月9日 16:37 >> 收件人: dilla...@redhat.com >> Cc: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com >> 主题: 答复: [ceph-users] 答复: 答复: rbd expord-diff aren't counting >> AioTruncate op correctly >> >> Ah, sorry, I didn't understand you correctyly. We did use the >> librbd::Image::aio_discard method to resize the image from 4MB to 1MB. >> ________________________________________ >> 发件人: ceph-users [ceph-users-boun...@lists.ceph.com] 代表 许雪寒 >> [xuxue...@360.cn] >> 发送时间: 2017年4月3日 23:27 >> 收件人: dilla...@redhat.com >> Cc: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com >> 主题: [ceph-users] 答复: 答复: rbd expord-diff aren't counting AioTruncate >> op correctly >> >> Hi, actually, in our test, we created an image with the size 4MB which means >> it has only one object, then we write data into it, create a snap, clone it >> and create a snap of the new image, say "snap1", and then we send a >> "AioTruncate" to truncate the image to 1MB and create the second snap of the >> new image, say "snap2". Then, we use export-diff to calculate the "diff" >> between snap1 and snap2. By examing the result of export-diff, we confirmed >> that only the data that left in object are recorded into the export-diff's >> result, the truncate operation is lost. >> >> By the way, according to our understanding of the source code, it seems that >> the reason for this is that when doing copy-up, no clone is created even if >> there has already been some snapshot of the new image. So, if there's only >> one "WRITE" op is sent to the object, which leads to a "copy-up", before a >> new snapshot is created after which a export-diff is conducted, the >> export-diff will copy all the data in the HEAD object, which, in our case, >> is not the "diff" that we want. >> ________________________________________ >> 发件人: Jason Dillaman [jdill...@redhat.com] >> 发送时间: 2017年4月3日 23:00 >> 收件人: 许雪寒 >> Cc: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com >> 主题: Re: 答复: [ceph-users] rbd expord-diff aren't counting AioTruncate >> op correctly >> >> Are you referring to the class "AioTruncate"? If so, *how* did you >> issue the truncate against a specific object? Did you use the RBD >> API's discard method? Did you resize an image? I need a repeatable set >> of instructions. >> >> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 10:58 AM, 许雪寒 <xuxue...@360.cn> wrote: >>> Hi, the operation we performed is AioTruncate. >>> ________________________________________ >>> 发件人: Jason Dillaman [jdill...@redhat.com] >>> 发送时间: 2017年4月3日 22:11 >>> 收件人: 许雪寒 >>> Cc: ceph-users@lists.ceph.com >>> 主题: Re: [ceph-users] rbd expord-diff aren't counting AioTruncate op >>> correctly >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:36 PM, 许雪寒 <xuxue...@360.cn> wrote: >>>> We created an image, write data into it, then protect it and clone a new >>>> image. Then we create a snapshot, snap1, of the cloned image, then >>>> truncate it and create a snapshot, snap2. In the diff of the two snapshot, >>>> we found that only the data that are not truncated is recorded in the >>>> diff, which means the truncate operation is not reflected by the diff. >>> >>> When you say "truncate" above, what specific operation are you >>> performing so that I can attempt to recreate it? >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jason >> >> >> >> -- >> Jason >> _______________________________________________ >> ceph-users mailing list >> ceph-users@lists.ceph.com >> http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com > > > > -- > Jason -- Jason _______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list ceph-users@lists.ceph.com http://lists.ceph.com/listinfo.cgi/ceph-users-ceph.com
