[Csync2] csync2 prefix mapping ==> I/O Error 'No such file or directory' in rsync-check
Samba
saasira at gmail.com
Mon Jul 23 18:38:08 CEST 2012
Hi Lars,
I noticed that the previous patch that I sent was only syncing the lowest
level subdirectory [all files under it] in which one of the files matching
the configured pattern have changed. It is not the parent directories even
the parent directory is missing on the slave side.
I tried something like:
in update.c
strncpy(temp,filename,filename_length+1);
349 do {
350
get_parent_child_from_path(parent_dirname,NULL,temp);
351 csync_debug(0,"missing parent
dir : %s; temp %s",parent_dirname, temp);
352
strncpy(temp,parent_dirname,strlen(parent_dirname)+1);
353 conn_printf("SIG %s %s\n",
url_encode(key), url_encode(temp));
354
last_conn_status=read_conn_status(temp, peername);
355 } while(
last_conn_status==CONNECTION_RESPONSE_PARENT_DIR_MISSING);
in daemon.c
if ( lstat_strict(filepath, &st) != 0 ) {
555 csync_debug(3,"error : %s while
stating %s ",strerror(errno),filepath);
556 if ( errno == ENOENT ) {
557 struct stat sb;
558 char
parent_dirname[strlen(filepath)];
559
get_parent_child_from_path(parent_dirname,NULL,filepath);
560 if (
lstat_strict(prefixsubst(parent_dirname), &sb) != 0 ) {
561 conn_printf("OK
(parent_dir_missing).\n---\noctet-stream 0 \n");
562 } else {
563 conn_printf("OK
(path_not_found).\n---\noctet-stream 0\n") ;
564 }
565 } else {
566 cmd_error =
strerror(errno);
567 }
568 break;
569 } else if ( csync_check_pure(tag[2]) ) {
570 conn_printf("OK
(path_not_found).\n---\noctet-stream 0\n");
571 break;
572 }
so that I can find the last available parent directory on the Slave
server and can mark anything under that directory as dirty; but for some
reason the slave does not return the message "OK (parent_dir_missing)" for
the second "command/request". For the first SIG command it does indeed
return "OK (parent_dir_missing)" but after that the response for second SIG
is "---\n" which is strange. Is the csync protocol stateful and needs to be
communicated in a particular order? If not, then can you please guide me as
to what can be done to achieve what I'm expecting? i.e. repeatedly SIG the
slave/peer for finding if the parent directory of a given path exists or
if it is just the current path that is missing or the path exists but has
contents different from that on master. If SIG is not the proper
command/signal that needs to be used for this purpose, then do let me know
which other command can work here.
I think the only thing that needs to be done is find the last available
parent directory from the path of the file to be synced and then mark all
the files and subdirectories matching the configured patterns as dirty so
that all these files and subdirs gets synced up with the peer in the next
round of cron job.
Thanks and Regards,
Samba
===================================================================================
On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Lars Ellenberg <lars.ellenberg at linbit.com
> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 10:44:13PM +0530, Samba wrote:
> > Hi Lars,
> >
> > I have updated the patch to also sync the complete directory tree, but in
> > the subsequent run.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Sorry for response times, swamped.
> Though I should find some time for csync2 next week.
>
> > I tried to make it sync in the same run by trying to invoke
> > csync_update_file_mod funtion but was getting "Format Error", so left it
> > with syncing in the subsequent run by marking those children
> > [files/folders] as dirty.
> >
> > I also made a minor fix related to creating the configured backup
> directory
> > instead of failing with an unrecognizable error message "Format Error".
> >
> > I'm confident that this patch makes csync2 more stabler and leavese very
> > few chances of failing.
> >
> > I hope this patch gets approved and finally makes its way to the trunk
> soon.
> >
> >
> > Thanks and Regards,
> > Samba
> >
> >
> > PS:
> >
> > A note about handling deletes with auto-mode younger/older --- perhaps
> we
> > may not have a clean way of identifying whether the deletion on one node
> is
> > younger than a modification on the other node when we are relying on
> > scheduled mechanism like cron but we would certainly be able to
> distinguish
> > when we integrate an inode eventing mechanism like lsync for populating
> the
> > "hints" table. I agree that we should keep it for future though.
>
> In that case you are talking about a tight race.
>
> If you call csync2 -u "occasionally" only, then conflicts can happen.
>
> But if you trigger it "immediately" (via inotify),
> to have a conflict there,
> you'd really need this to happen "simultaneously".
>
> Because usually, you'd have either the deletion first (and propagated),
> and then not a modify, but a (re-)create (propagated).
> Or you'd have the modify (also propagated),
> and then a delete (propagated).
>
> So that would mean you really don't want to use csync2 as arbitrator
> there, but fix your application to use some means of cooperation
> ("locking"?) *outside* of csync2.
>
>
> Lars
> _______________________________________________
> Csync2 mailing list
> Csync2 at lists.linbit.com
> http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/csync2
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linbit.com/pipermail/csync2/attachments/20120723/dc28199b/attachment.htm>
More information about the Csync2
mailing list