Thanks for the clarification. That behaviour is quite weird as arbiter bricks should hold only metadata. What does the following show on host uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01: du -h -x -d 1 /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick1/brickdu -h -x -d 1 /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick3/brickdu -h -x -d 1 /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick2/brick
If indeed the shards are taking space - that is a really strange situation.From which version did you upgrade and which one is now ? I assume all gluster TSP members (the servers) have the same version, but it’s nice to double check. Does the archival job actually deletes the original files after being processed or the workload keeps overriding the existing files ? Best Regards,Strahil Nikolov Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Tuesday, July 4, 2023, 6:50 PM, Liam Smith <[email protected]> wrote: #yiv0069265236 P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}Hi Strahil, We're using gluster to act as a share for an application to temporarily process and store files, before they're then archived off over night. The issue we're seeing isn't with the inodes running out of space, but the actual disk space on the arb server running low. This is the df -h output for the bricks on the arb server:/dev/sdd1 15G 12G 3.3G 79% /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick3/dev/sdc1 15G 2.8G 13G 19% /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick1/dev/sde1 15G 14G 1.6G 90% /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick2 And this is the df -hi output for the bricks on the arb server:/dev/sdd1 7.5M 2.7M 4.9M 35% /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick3/dev/sdc1 7.5M 643K 6.9M 9% /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick1/dev/sde1 6.1M 3.0M 3.1M 49% /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick2 So the inode usage appears to be fine, but we're seeing that the actual disk usage keeps increasing on the bricks despite it being the arbiter. The actual issue appears to be that files under /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick3/brick/.shard/.remove_me/ and/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick2/brick/.shard/.remove_me/ are being retained, even when the original files are deleted from the data nodes. For reference, I've attached disk usage graphs for brick 3 over the past two weeks; one is a graph from a data node, the other from the arb. As you can see, the disk usage of the data node builds throughout the day, but then an archival job clears space down. However, on the arb, we see the disk space increasing in the same sort of trend, but it's never cleared down like the data node. Hopefully this clarifies the issue, we're a bit confused as to why this is occurring and whether this is actually intended behaviour or potentially a bug, so any advice is greatly appreciated. Thanks, | | | | | | | Liam Smith | | Linux Systems Support Engineer, Scholar | | | | | | The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from disclosure. | | | | From: Strahil Nikolov <[email protected]> Sent: 04 July 2023 15:51 To: Liam Smith <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] remove_me files building up | CAUTION: This e-mail originates from outside of Ekco. Do not click links or attachments unless you recognise the sender. | Hi Liam, I saw that your XFS uses ‘imaxpct=25’ which for an arbiter brick is a little bit low. If you have free space on the bricks, increase the maxpct to a bigger value, like:xfs_growfs -m 80 /path/to/brickThat will set 80% of the Filesystem for inodes, which you can verify with df -i /brick/path (compare before and after). This way you won’t run out of inodes in the future. Of course, always test that on non Prod first. Are you using the volume for VM disk storage domain ? What is your main workload ? Best Regards,Strahil Nikolov On Tuesday, July 4, 2023, 2:12 PM, Liam Smith <[email protected]> wrote: <!--#yiv0069265236 #yiv0069265236x_yiv8784601153 p {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}-->Hi, Thanks for your response, please find the xfs_info for each brick on the arbiter below: root@uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:~# xfs_info /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick1meta-data=/dev/sdc1 isize=512 agcount=31, agsize=131007 blks = sectsz=512 attr=2, projid32bit=1 = crc=1 finobt=1, sparse=1, rmapbt=0 = reflink=1data = bsize=4096 blocks=3931899, imaxpct=25 = sunit=0 swidth=0 blksnaming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0, ftype=1log =internal log bsize=4096 blocks=2560, version=2 = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 root@uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:~# xfs_info /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick2meta-data=/dev/sde1 isize=512 agcount=13, agsize=327616 blks = sectsz=512 attr=2, projid32bit=1 = crc=1 finobt=1, sparse=1, rmapbt=0 = reflink=1data = bsize=4096 blocks=3931899, imaxpct=25 = sunit=0 swidth=0 blksnaming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0, ftype=1log =internal log bsize=4096 blocks=2560, version=2 = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 root@uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:~# xfs_info /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick3meta-data=/dev/sdd1 isize=512 agcount=13, agsize=327616 blks = sectsz=512 attr=2, projid32bit=1 = crc=1 finobt=1, sparse=1, rmapbt=0 = reflink=1data = bsize=4096 blocks=3931899, imaxpct=25 = sunit=0 swidth=0 blksnaming =version 2 bsize=4096 ascii-ci=0, ftype=1log =internal log bsize=4096 blocks=2560, version=2 = sectsz=512 sunit=0 blks, lazy-count=1realtime =none extsz=4096 blocks=0, rtextents=0 I've also copied below some df output from the arb server: root@uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:~# df -hiFilesystem Inodes IUsed IFree IUse% Mounted onudev 992K 473 991K 1% /devtmpfs 995K 788 994K 1% /run/dev/sda1 768K 105K 664K 14% /tmpfs 995K 3 995K 1% /dev/shmtmpfs 995K 4 995K 1% /run/locktmpfs 995K 18 995K 1% /sys/fs/cgroup/dev/sdb1 128K 113 128K 1% /var/lib/glusterd/dev/sdd1 7.5M 2.6M 5.0M 35% /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick3/dev/sdc1 7.5M 600K 7.0M 8% /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick1/dev/sde1 6.4M 2.9M 3.5M 46% /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick2uk1-prod-gfs-01:/gv1 150M 6.5M 144M 5% /mnt/gfstmpfs 995K 21 995K 1% /run/user/1004 root@uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:~# df -hFilesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted onudev 3.9G 0 3.9G 0% /devtmpfs 796M 916K 795M 1% /run/dev/sda1 12G 3.9G 7.3G 35% /tmpfs 3.9G 8.0K 3.9G 1% /dev/shmtmpfs 5.0M 0 5.0M 0% /run/locktmpfs 3.9G 0 3.9G 0% /sys/fs/cgroup/dev/sdb1 2.0G 456K 1.9G 1% /var/lib/glusterd/dev/sdd1 15G 12G 3.5G 78% /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick3/dev/sdc1 15G 2.6G 13G 18% /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick1/dev/sde1 15G 14G 1.8G 89% /data/glusterfs/gv1/brick2uk1-prod-gfs-01:/gv1 300G 139G 162G 47% /mnt/gfstmpfs 796M 0 796M 0% /run/user/1004 Something I forgot to mention in my initial message is that the opversion was upgraded from 70200 to 100000, which seems as though it could have been a trigger for the issue as well. Thanks, | | | | | | | Liam Smith | | Linux Systems Support Engineer, Scholar | | | | | | | | | | From: Strahil Nikolov <[email protected]> Sent: 03 July 2023 18:28 To: Liam Smith <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Gluster-users] remove_me files building up | CAUTION: This e-mail originates from outside of Ekco. Do not click links or attachments unless you recognise the sender. | Hi, you mentioned that the arbiter bricks run out of inodes.Are you using XFS ?Can you provide the xfs_info of each brick ? Best Regards,Strahil Nikolov The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from disclosure. On Sat, Jul 1, 2023 at 19:41, Liam Smith<[email protected]> wrote:Hi, We're running a cluster with two data nodes and one arbiter, and have sharding enabled. We had an issue a while back where one of the server's crashed, we got the server back up and running and ensured that all healing entries cleared, and also increased the server spec (CPU/Mem) as this seemed to be the potential cause. Since then however, we've seen some strange behaviour, whereby a lot of 'remove_me' files are building up under `/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick2/brick/.shard/.remove_me/` and `/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick3/brick/.shard/.remove_me/`. This is causing the arbiter to run out of space on brick2 and brick3, as the remove_me files are constantly increasing. brick1 appears to be fine, the disk usage increases throughout the day and drops down in line with the trend of the brick on the data nodes. We see the disk usage increase and drop throughout the day on the data nodes for brick2 and brick3 as well, but while the arbiter follows the same trend of the disk usage increasing, it doesn't drop at any point. This is the output of some gluster commands, occasional heal entries come and go: root@uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:~# gluster volume info gv1 Volume Name: gv1Type: Distributed-ReplicateVolume ID: d3d1fdec-7df9-4f71-b9fc-660d12c2a046Status: StartedSnapshot Count: 0Number of Bricks: 3 x (2 + 1) = 9Transport-type: tcpBricks:Brick1: uk1-prod-gfs-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick1/brickBrick2: uk2-prod-gfs-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick1/brickBrick3: uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick1/brick (arbiter)Brick4: uk1-prod-gfs-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick3/brickBrick5: uk2-prod-gfs-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick3/brickBrick6: uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick3/brick (arbiter)Brick7: uk1-prod-gfs-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick2/brickBrick8: uk2-prod-gfs-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick2/brickBrick9: uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick2/brick (arbiter)Options Reconfigured:cluster.entry-self-heal: oncluster.metadata-self-heal: oncluster.data-self-heal: onperformance.client-io-threads: offstorage.fips-mode-rchecksum: ontransport.address-family: inetcluster.lookup-optimize: offperformance.readdir-ahead: offcluster.readdir-optimize: offcluster.self-heal-daemon: enablefeatures.shard: enablefeatures.shard-block-size: 512MBcluster.min-free-disk: 10%cluster.use-anonymous-inode: yes root@uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:~# gluster peer status Number of Peers: 2 Hostname: uk2-prod-gfs-01Uuid: 2fdfa4a2-195d-4cc5-937c-f48466e76149State: Peer in Cluster (Connected) Hostname: uk1-prod-gfs-01Uuid: 43ec93d1-ad83-4103-aea3-80ded0903d88State: Peer in Cluster (Connected) root@uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:~# gluster volume heal gv1 info Brick uk1-prod-gfs-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick1/brick<gfid:5b57e1f6-3e3d-4334-a0db-b2560adae6d1>Status: ConnectedNumber of entries: 1 Brick uk2-prod-gfs-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick1/brickStatus: ConnectedNumber of entries: 0 Brick uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick1/brickStatus: ConnectedNumber of entries: 0 Brick uk1-prod-gfs-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick3/brickStatus: ConnectedNumber of entries: 0 Brick uk2-prod-gfs-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick3/brickStatus: ConnectedNumber of entries: 0 Brick uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick3/brickStatus: ConnectedNumber of entries: 0 Brick uk1-prod-gfs-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick2/brickStatus: ConnectedNumber of entries: 0 Brick uk2-prod-gfs-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick2/brick<gfid:6ba9c472-9232-4b45-b12f-a1232d6f4627>/.shard/.remove_me<gfid:0f042518-248d-426a-93f4-cfaa92b6ef3e>Status: ConnectedNumber of entries: 3 Brick uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:/data/glusterfs/gv1/brick2/brick<gfid:6ba9c472-9232-4b45-b12f-a1232d6f4627>/.shard/.remove_me<gfid:0f042518-248d-426a-93f4-cfaa92b6ef3e>Status: ConnectedNumber of entries: 3 root@uk3-prod-gfs-arb-01:~# gluster volume get all cluster.op-versionOption Value------ -----cluster.op-version 100000 We're not sure if this is a potential bug or if something's corrupted that we don't have visibility of, so any pointers/suggestions about how to approach this would be appreciated. Thanks,Liam | | The contents of this email message and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee(s) and may contain confidential and/or privileged information and may be legally protected from disclosure. ________ Community Meeting Calendar: Schedule - Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC Bridge: https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk Gluster-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
________ Community Meeting Calendar: Schedule - Every 2nd and 4th Tuesday at 14:30 IST / 09:00 UTC Bridge: https://meet.google.com/cpu-eiue-hvk Gluster-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
