Replication on a remote server

Troubleshooting
1

HI, I have installed 2 rockstor server.
I’m trying to replicate data from the fist one to the second. But I receive this error:

Failed to get the sender ip for appliance: 00000000-58c49790-11d3-4407-b41f-247715aba30b. Exception: Appliance matching query does not exist… Aborting. Exception: unexpected reply(receiver-error) for 00000000-58c49790-11d3-4407-b41f-247715aba30b-1. extended reply: Failed to get the sender ip for appliance: 00000000-58c49790-11d3-4407-b41f-247715aba30b. Exception: Appliance matching query does not exist… Aborting

Both of them have a 2TB HD. They have 2 ethernet card.
The first one for management and the second one for replication service.
This service run on a separate lan with a patch that connect the 2 server.
I have checked in ssh, they work properly.
The access key is properly configured infact I can open the second web gui from RockStor Appliances page…
I’m using System is running the latest Rockstor version: 3.8-12
Any suggest?

2

HI Tsasim,

I had the same issue on my first attempt when I tried to configure my replication server.
try deleting both appliances and replication tasks and re-add them with a newly created Access Key.

Also check the following:
Did you select the correct ethernet connection under system/services/replication (Click on little pencil to edit and leave the listener port number on default 10002.
Did you use the IP that was configured on the second lan card set for replication when you added your appliance?
Did you configure your ethernet cards with static IP’s?
When you add your appliances leave management port on 443.
Did you add both nas servers as appliances on each other for sending / receiving replication tasks?

Here’s how my servers are setup.

Main nas:
Ethernet 1 - 192.168.1.16 role set as management
Ethernet 2 - 192.168.1.17 role set as replication

Under Appliances I used IP 192.168.1.18 with a newly created access key names as rep

Second replication nas:
Ethernet 1 - 192.168.1.18 - set as management which I Also use for replication
ethernet 2 - (N/A) server acts a replication server only no need for second configured NIC

Hope some of this info helped

1 Like
3

Hi,
Could you give me the steps to do a replication with two node am configure but its not replication done its showing failed with no reponse error.

4

@Prabu_Raj Welcome to the Rockstor community.

This could well be down to a known regression / bug which we hope to get sorted soon. Please see the original reports in the following forum thread:

I’ll link to the same open issue here as well:

https://github.com/rockstor/rockstor-core/issues/1853

If you could check your Rockstor Logs (System - Logs Manager) you may well find the same as the original reporters, ie: “Invalid api end point:”

We had to make some large changes recently and this is hopefully the last regression bug as a result.

Hope that helps and this is on my list of things to attend to soon.

5

Hi Phillxnet,
Thank you for the welcome.
am got the error from the log while am replicate the server ([08/Jan/2018 11:13:37] ERROR [smart_manager.replication.receiver:89] Failed to verify/create share: DD904D56-BD20-BCBF-5143-F0216C7666B7_files… Exception: 500 Server Error: INTERNAL SERVER ERROR
[08/Jan/2018 11:14:36] ERROR [storageadmin.util:44] exception: Share(DD904D56-BD20-BCBF-5143-F0216C7666B7_files) already exists. Choose a different name
Traceback (most recent call last):
File “/opt/rockstor/eggs/gunicorn-0.16.1-py2.7.egg/gunicorn/workers/sync.py”, line 34, in run
client, addr = self.socket.accept()
File “/usr/lib64/python2.7/socket.py”, line 202, in accept
sock, addr = self._sock.accept()
error: [Errno 11] Resource temporarily unavailable
[08/Jan/2018 11:14:36] ERROR [smart_manager.replication.receiver:89] Failed to verify/create share: DD904D56-BD20-BCBF-5143-F0216C7666B7_files… Exception: 500 Server Error: INTERNAL SERVER ERROR)

6

@Prabu_Raj Thanks for the report.

Fairly sure your log entry can also be explained by the current known regression bug. It’s actually one of 2 issues I’m currently juggling and I have a fix in the works (detailed in the referenced issue above) so once I’ve tested some more and prepared that for submission (hopefully fairly soon) and if it passes review by @suman then it should be rolled out.

So hopefully that should help in due time.