RE: [Gluster-devel] Files erased while one brick was down in AFRreturns from the

[DeeDee Park]

Here is another scenario that I'm worried about.

If there is a file1 on brick1, and file2 on brick2.
and then brick1 goes down.
If I do a "mv file2 file1" or even up to the directory a "rename dir2 dir1", 
will AFR properly handle these cases?

dd

> From: "Daniel van Ham Colchete" <address@hidden>
> To: gluster-devel <address@hidden>
> Subject: [Gluster-devel] Files erased while one brick was down in 
> AFRreturns from the afterlife
> Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2007 14:30:40 -0300
> MIME-Version: 1.0
>
> People,
>
> Gerry Reno raised a very interesting question about AFR.
>
> Let's imagine the following case: two bricks AFRed. I create a few files
> (say mail files inside a Maildir). The second brick goes down. I erase a 
> few
> e-mails (checking my POP3 account). Them I bring back the second brick. The
> files created/changed during this time will be copied to the second as soon
> as I open() them. The problem is: if I "ls -la" I'll see the old erased
> files. If I try to open them GlusterFS will even replicate it. Why this is
> happening: when I do a "ls -la" Gluster will check both bricks and give the
> list of files inside both servers.
>
> I'm using only AFR, without unify. I tested it here and got the expected
> result.
>
> I can propose one solution for this problem. If you apply the same
> versioning algorithm used with files to the directories themselves the
> self-heal could detect witch dir has the newest file list and erase what's
> necessary.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Best regards,
> Daniel Colchete
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel

_________________________________________________________________
http://newlivehotmail.com