From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Fyodor Ustinov Subject: Re: 0.31 Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 00:53:11 +0300 Message-ID: <4E1A1F47.6050202@ufm.su> References: <4E19837D.7030702@ufm.su> <4E1A19AC.8060304@ufm.su> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail.ufm.su ([77.120.103.19]:52427 "EHLO mail.ufm.su" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756677Ab1GJVxO (ORCPT ); Sun, 10 Jul 2011 17:53:14 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: ceph-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Sage Weil Cc: ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org On 07/11/2011 12:36 AM, Sage Weil wrote: > On Mon, 11 Jul 2011, Fyodor Ustinov wrote: >> On 07/11/2011 12:12 AM, Sage Weil wrote: >>> Hmm, yeah the 'loaded dup inode' messages should never happen. They >>> appear to be just files, though, not directories, so you can safely ignore >>> them. The namespace repair will need to clean that up at some point. The >>> recursive rstat errors you saw are probably just fallout from that, and >>> can also be ignored. >> I understand it correctly, that until not implemented the Feature # 86 I have >> no way to fix this? > Right. Well, this is going to come incrementally. We'll have a namespace > scan that fixes some basic issues before there is a full-blown robust > repair tool. ok, I'll be waiting impatiently. > :) Okay. We're putting locking specific tests in place before trying to > reproduce #1150 with Amanda, BTW. It sounds like we need an amanda-like > workload though anyway, given the issues you're seeing. How old is this > fs? How many times has it been upgraded? fs has been created not later 2011-06-09. I'm not sure that I understand correctly "fs upgraded", but cluster upgraded to each new ceph versions. I.e. 0.29 -> 0.29.1 -> 0.30 -> 0.31 WBR, Fyodor.