[sheepdog-users] SIGABRT when doing: dog vdi check

[Liu Yuan]

On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 05:38:41PM +0100, Marcin Mirosław wrote:
> W dniu 2014-01-06 08:27, Liu Yuan pisze:
> > On Sat, Jan 04, 2014 at 04:13:27PM +0100, Marcin Mirosław wrote:
> >> W dniu 2014-01-04 06:28, Liu Yuan pisze:
> >>> On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 10:51:26PM +0100, Marcin Mirosław wrote:
> >>>> Hi!
> >>
> >> Hi all!
> >>
> >>>> I'm new on "sheep-run";) I'm starting to try sheepdog so probably
> >>>> I'm doing many things wrongly. I'm playing with sheepdog-0.7.6.
> >>>>
> >>>> First problem (SIGABRT): I started multi sheep daemeon on
> >>>> localhost: # for x in 0 1 2 3 4; do sheep -c local -j size=128M
> >>>> -p 700$x /mnt/sheep/metadata/$x,/mnt/sheep/storage/$x; done
> >>>>
> >>>> Next: # dog cluster info Cluster status: Waiting for cluster to
> >>>> be formatted
> >>>>
> >>>> # dog cluster format -c 2:1
> >>>
> >>> 0.7.6 doesn't support erasure code. Try latest master branch
> >>
> >> Now I'm on 486ace8ccbb [master]. How I should check choosen redundancy?
> >>  # cat /mnt/test/vdi/list
> >>    Name        Id    Size    Used  Shared    Creation time   VDI id
> >> Copies  Tag
> >>    testowy      0  1.0 GB  0.0 MB  0.0 MB 2014-01-04 15:07   cac836     3
> >>
> >> Here I can see 3 copies, can't see info about how many parity strips
> >> is configured. Probably this isn't implemented yet?
> > 
> > Not yet. But currently you can 'dog cluster info -s' to see the global policy
> > scheme x:y (that you 'dog cluster format -c x:y').
> > 
> > With erasure coding, 'copies' will have another meaning that the number of total
> > data + parity objects. In your case, it is 2+1=3. But as you said, this is
> > confusing, I think of adding a extra field to indicate redundancy scheme per vid.
> > 
> > Well, for about issue, I can't reproduce it. Could you give me more envronment
> > information such as 32 or 64 bits of your OS? what is your distro?
> 
> Hi!
> I'm using Gentoo 64bits, gcc version 4.7.3 (Gentoo Hardened 4.7.3-r1
> p1.4, pie-0.5.5), kernel 3.10 with Gentoo patches.
> 

Does the problem still exist? I can't reproduce the issue yet. So how did you
reproduce it step by step?

Thanks
Yuan