search for: lockd

On Sun, Jun 04, 2017 at 08:57:44AM -0400, Michael Butler wrote: > It seems that {rpc.}lockd no longer runs after the ino64 changes on any > of my systems after a full rebuild of src and ports. No log entries > offer any insight as to why :-( > > imb I don't tend to use NFS on my systems that are running head, so I haven't had occasion to test this as stated. Howeve...

Greetings, CentOS. After up2dating one of the corporate mail servers to CentOS 4.4 (was CentOS 4.2) and upgrading kernel to kernel-smp-2.6.9-42.0.3.EL, the following kernel messages started to appear in syslog: [root at gamma ~]# dmesg ........... ...CUT..... ........... lockd: unexpected unlock status: 1 lockd: unexpected unlock status: 1 lockd: unexpected unlock status: 1 lockd: unexpected unlock status: 1 lockd: unexpected unlock status: 1 lockd: unexpected unlock status: 1 lockd: unexpected unlock status: 1 lockd: unexpected unlock status: 1 lockd: unexpected unlock...

...e in the same VLAN. I have about 100 servers on the 40GB bonded network each with 12cores and 128GB of memory. They are running centos 6.6 Except for my storage servers they are all just running large and small research jobs on a grid engine. Two questions: The errors she seems to spawn is lockd: spurious grace period reject?! lockd: failed to reclaim lock for pid 8225 (errno -37, status 4) lockd: spurious grace period reject?! lockd: failed to reclaim lock for pid 8225 (errno -37, status 4) and at some point, we start getting errors that the file locks are stuck.. you can write and read...

...s there a way to get a date stamp for the dmesg? At least on CentOS7: dmesg -T ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dan Hyatt" <dhyatt at dsgmail.wustl.edu> To: "CentOS mailing list" <centos at centos.org> Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2016 1:36:46 PM Subject: [CentOS] Lockd: failed to reclaim lock for pid ... My environment is "heterogeneous" my authentication and home server are currently stuck on a 1G shared network, the production servers and storage servers are on a bonded 40G network, all are in the same VLAN. I have about 100 servers on the 40GB bo...

Running the nightly from two days ago. The Dovecot log shows no errors, but I keep getting login errors for a few users. top shows: 71486 user1 1 96 0 4552K 2408K lockd 0 0:00 0.00% imap 11170 user2 1 96 0 4440K 2480K lockd 0 0:00 0.00% imap And a ps aux shows that these processes have been open for hours. If I move the mbox that contains their mail, the same error still shows up. The mboxes reside on our NetApp which is NFS mounted-- does an...

...servers. Now I've had this problem 2 times (about 2 weeks since the last occurrence). I use drbd on the nfs server for redundancy. Now to my problem: All my web sites stopped responding so I started by checking dmesg and there I found a bunch of this errors || Aug 11 16:00:39 web03 kernel: lockd: server 192.168.20.22 not responding, timed out Aug 11 16:02:39 web03 kernel: lockd: server 192.168.20.22 not responding, timed out But when checking the nfs server lockd was running and I could access all the files from the webserver with ls, cd etc. The logs on the nfs server doesn't say...

hey list! I am attempting to shore up some centos machines (ranging from centos 5 to centos 5.4) for pci compliance by changing the port that nlockdmgr listens on to function under a privileged port. So what I did was try to hardcode the port by editing /etc/sysconfig/nfs # TCP port rpc.lockd should listen on. LOCKD_TCPPORT=1011 # UDP port rpc.lockd should listen on. LOCKD_UDPPORT=1011 # And /etc/modprobe.conf alias eth1 e1000e alias s...

...e3ec>] [<c01441c9>] [<c013ef33>] [<c0122f5b>] [<c0146e47>] [<e095f182>] [<c0146fcc>] [<c0130eda>] [<c0131f2a>] [<c013126f>] [<c0106fd3>] Code: 0f 0b 83 c4 14 8b 4c 24 28 bd e2 ff ff ff f6 41 10 04 0f 85 >>EIP; e094e940 <[lockd]nlmsvc_decode_testargs+b8/1f0> <===== Trace; e0954980 <[lockd].rodata.end+1b8/1c0> Trace; e0954bc6 <[lockd]nlmsvc_procedures+186/300> Trace; e0954960 <[lockd].rodata.end+198/1c0> Trace; e0954c20 <[lockd]nlmsvc_procedures+1e0/300> Trace; e094ece4 <[lockd]nlmsvc_dec...

Hello, I am attempting to get flock/file locking working between my -stable (updated ~19 may) nfs file server and -current desktop; the server is running lockd/statd, and both my mail client (mutt) and a simple perl program complain that files on the nfs server cannot be locked. I am aware that there has been work on the nfs locking code in current, and have a vague recollection of a workaround required for the situation I am in, but cannot remember it (a...

Hi, The NFS server is running FreeBSD 6.0, and no problems with other NFS client with FreeBSD 6. When a new client with FreeBSD 7 comes, the NFS server always says: Apr 2 03:52:01 xxxx rpc.lockd: clntudp_create: RPC: Program not registered Apr 2 03:52:01 xxxx rpc.lockd: Unable to return result to 192.168.4.248 The 192.168.4.248's OS is FreeBSD 7, and it can successfully mount the directories on NFS server. It seems something wrong with rpc.lockd ? The 'rpc.lockd' seems total...

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:33, Alan Bartlett <ajb.stxsl at googlemail.com> wrote: > The subject line for this "conversation / thread" reads: > "Re: [CentOS-docs] [CentOS] Is the NFS lockd bug fixed ?" > The contents, however, relates to XFS & the CentOSPlus kernel. > Filipe, please take care with what you do. :-) Very sorry about that. Fixed it now. In reply to Akemi's e-mails, I was not aware that I had wiki-wide edit rights, but I'm glad that I do. Be sure...

I thnk I posted this last week, but to refresh your minds (for Americans, after all the turkey): two C7 boxes, updated. box 1 is exporting directories; box 2 is not running nfs. From box 1, every minute, I get <...> kernel: lockd: server fred.local not responding, timed out Now, on box 2, fred is eth0:fred, and is one of five secondaries on eth0. When I do an ip a, it shows as the last one. Further, df shows no directory from box 1 being mounted. So, does anyone have a clue on this? mark

Hello, is dotlock supposed to work with NFS? I noticed that the default-locking method causes problems even with nfslockd started. Regards Marten

Hi all, Trying to test libvirt 1.1.3 with virtlockd locking my qcow2 images on a NFS storage between two kvm hosts. ./configure ... --with-init-script=upstart Libvirtd upstart script is actually well generated but I can't see nothing about virtlockd... or am I blind ? :) Nevertheless, running virtlockd -d && service libvirtd restart wor...

...Feb 13 12:21:22 2023] nfs: server x.x.253.252 not responding, still trying [Mon Feb 13 12:21:28 2023] nfs: server x.x.253.252 not responding, still trying [Mon Feb 13 12:22:31 2023] nfs: server x.x.253.252 OK [Mon Feb 13 12:22:31 2023] nfs: server x.x.253.252 OK And/or [Mon Feb 13 12:27:01 2023] lockd: server x.x.253.252 not responding, still trying [Mon Feb 13 12:27:37 2023] lockd: server x.x.253.252 not responding, still trying [Mon Feb 13 12:27:43 2023] lockd: server x.x.253.252 OK [Mon Feb 13 12:28:46 2023] lockd: server x.x.253.252 not responding, still trying [Mon Feb 13 12:28:50 2023] loc...

...which used a simple touch() locking mechanism). I'm having a spot of bother getting Xapian to obtain a lock (hangs on fcntl64()). I've read http://trac.xapian.org/wiki/XapianOverNFS and other list posts, and noted that a lock daemon should be running to allow locks to occur. Now, lockd *is* running (but isn't listening on any ports), but apparently NFSv4 doesn't use lockd to perform locks, it's built into the protocol. So, how-now-brown-cow? I'm tempted to dig into Xapian's guts and simply change it to perform no locking since my backend system manager...

...p(user): fcntl() failed with mbox file /var/mail/user: No record locks available for syslog messages, and their mailbox operations would fail. In my case pine just closed the mailbox with an internal error. I did a quick fix by stopping dovecot, killing all dovecot processes, killing /usr/lib/nfs/lockd on the dovecot server, and restarting lockd. Ideas? Suggestions? Jeff Earickson Colby College

...2="no" MOUNTD_NFS_V3="no" # # # Path to remote quota server. See rquotad(8) #RQUOTAD="/usr/sbin/rpc.rquotad" # Port rquotad should listen on. #RQUOTAD_PORT=875 # Optinal options passed to rquotad #RPCRQUOTADOPTS="" # # # Optional arguments passed to in-kernel lockd #LOCKDARG= # TCP port rpc.lockd should listen on. #LOCKD_TCPPORT=32803 # UDP port rpc.lockd should listen on. #LOCKD_UDPPORT=32769 # # # Optional arguments passed to rpc.nfsd. See rpc.nfsd(8) # Turn off v2 and v3 protocol support RPCNFSDARGS="-N 2 -N 3" # Turn off v4 protocol support #RPC...

...localhost tmp]# cat /proc/locks | grep 17532905 42: OFDLCK ADVISORY READ -1 fd:00:17532905 201 201 43: OFDLCK ADVISORY READ -1 fd:00:17532905 100 101 Indeed, try to associate and booting the disk to another machines give me an error (stating that the disk is alredy in use). Enabling the "lockd" plugin and starting the same machine, "cat /proc/locks" looks different: [root@localhost tmp]# cat /proc/locks | grep 17532905 31: POSIX ADVISORY WRITE 19266 fd:00:17532905 0 0 32: OFDLCK ADVISORY READ -1 fd:00:17532905 201 201 33: OFDLCK ADVISORY READ -1 fd:00:17532905 100 1...

This was previously posed to the sun-managers mailing list but the only reply I received recommended I post here at well. We have a production Solaris 10u5 / ZFS X4500 file server which is reporting NLM_DENIED_NOLOCKS immediately for any nfs locking request. The lockd does not appear to be busy so is it possible we have hit some sort of limit on the number of files that can be locked? Are there any items to check before restarting lockd / statd. This appears to have at least temporarily cleared up the issue. Thanks, Chris -------------- next part --------------...