Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

prevent gnfs IO Errors on smaller files #4333

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: release-10
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

erikja
Copy link
Contributor

@erikja erikja commented Apr 10, 2024

In certain situations, smaller files will report I/O errors when accessed from NFS using Gluster NFS. With our settings, files up to 170M could report this in some cases. It was not a consistent failure.

Disbling the NFS performance I/O cache seemed to work around the instances of the problem observed for non-sharded volumes.

Research showed that gluster NFS is relying on an errno return value of EINVAL to detect EOF and set is_eof. However, in some paths this value was not retained or was reset to zero.

This change passes the errno along so it can be used by gluster NFS. We found the issue in the shard xlator and the io-cache xlator.

In certain situations, smaller files will report I/O errors when accessed
from NFS using Gluster NFS. With our settings, files up to 170M could report
this in some cases. It was not a consistent failure.

Disbling the NFS performance I/O cache seemed to work around the instances
of the problem observed for non-sharded volumes.

Research showed that gluster NFS is relying on an errno return value of
EINVAL to detect EOF and set is_eof. However, in some paths this value
was not retained or was reset to zero.

This change passes the errno along so it can be used by gluster NFS. We
found the issue in the shard xlator and the io-cache xlator.

Signed-off-by: Erik Jacobson <erikj@tdkt.org>
@gluster-ant
Copy link
Collaborator

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

2 similar comments
@gluster-ant
Copy link
Collaborator

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@gluster-ant
Copy link
Collaborator

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

@erikja
Copy link
Contributor Author

erikja commented Apr 10, 2024

see PR #4322

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants