<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-text-flowed" style="font-family: -moz-fixed;
font-size: 14px;" lang="x-unicode">(resending because my reply
only went to Lukáš)<br>
<br>
On 11/7/2013 3:20 AM, Lukáš Bezdička wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">I strongly suggest
not using 3.3.1 or whole 3.3 branch. I would only go for 3.4.1
on something close to production and even there I wouldn't yet
use rebalance/shrinking. We give gluster heavy testing before it
goes to production and about updating, why don't you build your
own packages? We are maintaining our builds for several years
now with our patches which gladly end up in gluster upstream
sooner or later.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
When I built the system, version 3.3.1 (and CentOS 6.3) was the
latest that was available. Before I added the new storage last
week, I got onto the IRC channel and asked whether I should
install the same version on the new servers, install the new
version on the new servers, or upgrade the entire cluster before
adding anything. I got no actual answers to that question, and
there wasn't really a lot of discussion that I noticed. If
someone did answer my question at that time, I missed it.
<br>
<br>
I decided to play it safe by installing the 3.3.1 version on the
new servers. It was a slightly newer revision, but I was told
that there were only packaging differences, that the code itself
was unchanged. I installed CentOS 6.4, which I figured would be
safe because Gluster is user-space and it's typically safe to
upgrade RHEL/CentOS minor versions.
<br>
<br>
Before we deployed, I did do tests on my testbed where I added new
storage bricks, did rebalances, removed bricks, etc. There were no
problems with adding bricks or rebalancing, but I had nowhere near
as many files or space used as we have in production. I did
encounter a bug with removing bricks, which I filed: <a
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=862347">https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=862347</a>
<br>
<br>
Except for the 91 files that appear to be simply gone and
unrecoverable, I am pretty much done dealing with the fallout ...
but I still have nearly 9TB of data that needs to migrate before
the bricks will be evenly filled, and I can't be sure that this
won't happen when I request another rebalance, or next time we
need to increase the volume size by adding bricks. I really need
an expert to evaluate our setup and make recommendations.
<br>
<br>
I sent a request off to Redhat Consulting for help on this, but I
haven't heard anything back from them.
<br>
<br>
Thanks,
<br>
Shawn
<br>
<br>
</div>
</body>
</html>