ctdb relock file issues with glusterfs

Volker Lendecke Volker.Lendecke at SerNet.DE
Tue Oct 9 02:22:28 MDT 2012

On Tue, Oct 09, 2012 at 04:32:12PM +1100, Amitay Isaacs wrote:
> Hi Gilbert,
> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 1:55 PM, patrick medina <pgmedinajr at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Howdy samba folks,
> >
> > I've been running into a lot of issues lately with ctdb's re-lock file and
> > glusterfs as the shared storage.  When I started, I could get one or the
> > other node to become healthy, but at least one would complain it could not
> > lock the re-lock file.  Nowi'm at the point where neither node will become
> > healthy and stay in a recovery loop.  Just to be sure it was the re-lock
> > file, I commented it out in the config and both nodes became healthy.
> >
> > I verified posix locking is enabled, along with ping_pong on both nodes
> > (919565 locks/sec (node 1), 924201 locks/sec (node 2)).

On the same file? Wow, this is several orders of magnitude
more than I have seen with any other cluster file system I
have seen so far. Either you are using some VERY low latency
interlink, glusterfs is doing some really good magic, or
fcntl locks are not propagated. I am seriously impressed.


SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen
phone: +49-551-370000-0, fax: +49-551-370000-9
AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen
http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kontakt at sernet.de

More information about the samba-technical mailing list