From: Abhishek Lekshmanan <abhishek@suse.com>
To: Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub <yehuda@redhat.com>
Cc: Ceph Devel <ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: RGW Multisite delete wierdness
Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2016 15:01:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <877fe77nih.fsf@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADRKj5RRcV=iw2hTSMRWsK+GShCnygwJEMWcA36v-jnKRDahdg@mail.gmail.com>
[..]
Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub writes:
>
> Yes, that would be a normal behaviour. The primary should not have
> concurrent sync operations on the same object if object has not
> completed previous sync operations. Looking at the log it really seems
> that we don't identify the concurrent sync operation on the same
> object. This should have been fixed by commit
> edea6d58dd25995bcc1ed4fc5be6f72ce4a6835a. Can you try to verify what
> went wrong there (whether can_do_op() returned true and why)?
Looked into this a bit, can_do_op() has returned true for the case when
primary issues a Fetch (or GET) and when a delete is issued,(even though
the Fetch is still not complete yet) by putting a debug log around when
we clear the keys, both the delete op and the get op creates and deletes
the same key successfully.
Which makes me suspect, that different instances of
RGWBucketIncSyncShardMarkerTrack are at play here, leading to different
independent values for key_to_marker. Is that possible?
Regards
Abhishek
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-02 13:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-19 16:10 RGW Multisite delete wierdness Abhishek Lekshmanan
2016-04-19 17:52 ` Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
2016-04-19 17:54 ` Abhishek L
2016-04-19 18:08 ` Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
2016-04-22 0:40 ` Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
2016-04-25 8:17 ` Abhishek Lekshmanan
2016-04-25 18:46 ` Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
2016-04-25 19:44 ` Abhishek L
2016-04-26 17:37 ` Abhishek Lekshmanan
2016-04-26 22:21 ` Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
2016-04-26 23:12 ` Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
2016-04-27 20:02 ` Abhishek L
2016-04-27 20:15 ` Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
2016-04-27 21:50 ` Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
2016-05-31 9:21 ` Abhishek Lekshmanan
2016-05-31 11:06 ` Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
2016-06-02 13:01 ` Abhishek Lekshmanan [this message]
2016-06-02 13:09 ` Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
2016-06-03 8:28 ` Abhishek Lekshmanan
2016-06-03 9:00 ` Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
2016-06-03 9:09 ` Yehuda Sadeh-Weinraub
2016-06-03 9:16 ` Abhishek Lekshmanan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=877fe77nih.fsf@suse.com \
--to=abhishek@suse.com \
--cc=ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yehuda@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox