[Gluster-users] 3.1.2 Debian - client_rpc_notify "failed to get the port number for remote subvolume"

[Anand Avati]

It is very likely the brick process is failing to start. Please look at the
brick log on that server. (in /var/log/glusterfs/bricks/* )

Avati

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 10:19 AM, phil cryer <phil at cryer.us> wrote:

> I have glusterfs 3.1.2 running on Debian, I'm able to start the volume
> and now mount it via mount -t gluster and I can see everything. I am
> still seeing the following error in /var/log/glusterfs/nfs.log
>
> [2011-02-04 13:09:16.404851] E
> [client-handshake.c:1079:client_query_portmap_cbk]
> bhl-volume-client-98: failed to get the port number for remote
> subvolume
> [2011-02-04 13:09:16.404909] I [client.c:1590:client_rpc_notify]
> bhl-volume-client-98: disconnected
> [2011-02-04 13:09:20.405843] E
> [client-handshake.c:1079:client_query_portmap_cbk]
> bhl-volume-client-98: failed to get the port number for remote
> subvolume
> [2011-02-04 13:09:20.405938] I [client.c:1590:client_rpc_notify]
> bhl-volume-client-98: disconnected
> [2011-02-04 13:09:24.406634] E
> [client-handshake.c:1079:client_query_portmap_cbk]
> bhl-volume-client-98: failed to get the port number for remote
> subvolume
> [2011-02-04 13:09:24.406711] I [client.c:1590:client_rpc_notify]
> bhl-volume-client-98: disconnected
> [2011-02-04 13:09:28.407249] E
> [client-handshake.c:1079:client_query_portmap_cbk]
> bhl-volume-client-98: failed to get the port number for remote
> subvolume
> [2011-02-04 13:09:28.407300] I [client.c:1590:client_rpc_notify]
> bhl-volume-client-98: disconnected
>
> However, if I do a gluster volume info I see that it's listed:
> # gluster volume info | grep 98
> Brick98: clustr-02:/mnt/data17
>
> I've gone to that host, unmounted the specific drive, ran fsck.ext4 on
> it, and it came back clean. Remounting and then restarting gluster on
> all the nodes hasn't changed anything, I keep getting that error.
> Also, I don't understand why it can't get the port number since it's
> working fine on 23 other bricks (drives) on that server; leads me to
> believe that it's not an accurate error.
>
> I searched the mailing lists and bug-tracker, and only found this similar
> bug:
> http://bugs.gluster.com/cgi-bin/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=1640
>
> Any idea what's going on? Is this just a benign error since the
> cluster still seems to be working, or ?
>
> Thanks
>
> P
> --
> http://philcryer.com
> _______________________________________________
> Gluster-users mailing list
> Gluster-users at gluster.org
> http://gluster.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gluster-users
>