search for: moosefs

Hi, A repository for MooseFS is just born. It provides CentOS 5.5 SRPMS, i386 and x86_64. cd /etc/yum.repos.d/; wget http://centos.kodros.fr/moosefs.repo ; yum install mfs Two points: - DNS may not be up to date where you are. The subdomain has just been created. Please be patient. - I have made an update to the .spec file,...

...e: > On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 07:21:16PM +0100, Alex Crow wrote: >> I've set up the "DR" side of my cluster to "use mmap = no" and with >> "private dir" removed from the smb.conf. > Why do you set "use mmap = no"? > >> I have the MooseFS guys on the case as well. Should I put them in touch >> with you or vice/versa? > MooseFS should not have any business at all in tdb files. If you still > find tdb files used on MooseFS, you should investigate your > configuration and modify it such that tdb files only exist on local...

...> Even if the only file we have to have on the cluster FS (which now >>> seems to be down solely to the ctdb lock file), I'm still worried >>> what these failures mean: >>> >>> 1) does the -rw (without -m) test suggest any problems with the >>> MooseFS FS I'm serving files to users from? >>> 2) does the mmap test failure mean I should not even have my CTDB >>> lock file on MooseFS? >>> 3) Do the inconsistent reports from a ping_pong -rw test show there >>> is a major problem with MooseFS as the underlying...

...uot; I meant it failed completely. > > Even if the only file we have to have on the cluster FS (which now > seems to be down solely to the ctdb lock file), I'm still worried what > these failures mean: > > 1) does the -rw (without -m) test suggest any problems with the > MooseFS FS I'm serving files to users from? > 2) does the mmap test failure mean I should not even have my CTDB lock > file on MooseFS? > 3) Do the inconsistent reports from a ping_pong -rw test show there is > a major problem with MooseFS as the underlying FS for Samba exports > and...

...er Lendecke wrote: > On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 10:00:21AM +0100, Alex Crow wrote: >> We've had a strange issue after following the recommendations at >> https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Ping_pong, particularly the part >> about mmap coherence. We are running CTDB/Samba over a MooseFS >> clustered FS, and we'd not done the ping-pong before. After finding >> that the mmap coherence test did not pass, we changed "use mmap" to >> "no" in smb.conf. > "use mmap" only affects tdbs, which should not sit on the clustered > fs, th...

...PM +0100, Alex Crow wrote: >>>> I've set up the "DR" side of my cluster to "use mmap = no" and with >>>> "private dir" removed from the smb.conf. >>> Why do you set "use mmap = no"? >>> >>>> I have the MooseFS guys on the case as well. Should I put them in touch >>>> with you or vice/versa? >>> MooseFS should not have any business at all in tdb files. If you still >>> find tdb files used on MooseFS, you should investigate your >>> configuration and modify it such th...

FYI, by "it did, completely" I meant it failed completely. Even if the only file we have to have on the cluster FS (which now seems to be down solely to the ctdb lock file), I'm still worried what these failures mean: 1) does the -rw (without -m) test suggest any problems with the MooseFS FS I'm serving files to users from? 2) does the mmap test failure mean I should not even have my CTDB lock file on MooseFS? 3) Do the inconsistent reports from a ping_pong -rw test show there is a major problem with MooseFS as the underlying FS for Samba exports and something needs to be do...

...ki, followed some advice and saw some > unexpected behaviour. Perhaps I imagined the wiki to be more moderated > that it really is, so my trust was misplaced. I don't blame anyone, all > I'm trying to do is solve a problem. > > > > > how should I put this? > > MooseFS sounds like it isn't useful with CTDB, you have paid for > > MooseFS, it doesn't work, so you are now blaming Samba. You need to do > > what Volker says and get MooseFS to work with mmap. > > AFAIK I don't need to get it to work with mmap, just get MooseFS to fix >...

Hi, We've had a strange issue after following the recommendations at https://wiki.samba.org/index.php/Ping_pong, particularly the part about mmap coherence. We are running CTDB/Samba over a MooseFS clustered FS, and we'd not done the ping-pong before. After finding that the mmap coherence test did not pass, we changed "use mmap" to "no" in smb.conf. This morning as users began to access their drives and profiles, performance tanked to such a degree that most people...

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 02:39:48PM +0100, Alex Crow wrote: > >The main hint I would like to give to the MooseFS developers is to get > >ping_pong -rw working. If you need any assistance in setting that up > >and getting arguments on why this is important, let us know! > > > >With best regards, > > > >Volker > > Any arguments that I can pass on would be much apprecia...

...> Volker HI Volker, I've set up the "DR" side of my cluster to "use mmap = no" and with "private dir" removed from the smb.conf. However I still have huge CPU utilisation from winbindd and smbd just fromtrying to long in a single test XP machine. I have the MooseFS guys on the case as well. Should I put them in touch with you or vice/versa? Many thanks for your gracious assistance, Alex -- This message is intended only for the addressee and may contain confidential information. Unless you are that person, you may not disclose its contents or use it in any...

Hi all, I just joigned this list, so I'm sorry if this problem has already been reported. I'm running Dovecot 2.0.13 on many servers, one for POP/IMAP access, others for LDA, others for authentification only, etc. All servers are accessing a shared file system, based on MooseFS (www.moosefs.org). The FS is mounted using FUSE. All my Dovecot servers have this configuration : mail_fsync = always mail_nfs_index = yes mail_nfs_storage = yes mmap_disable = yes (as adviced for NFS installation). But I'm still getting errors like this in POP/IMAP logs : Error: Corrupted...

...outcome, so I can more or less predict my future with this kind of projects). <rant> I really didn't mean to write this, but I figure it probably will surface once I start getting your advices, so here it is. I did my research having my requirements in mind and came up with the solution: moosefs. It is not reviewed much, no reviews with criticism at all, and not much you can ("I could" I should say) find howtos about customizations, performance tuning etc. It installs without a hitch. It runs well, until you start stress writing a lot to it in parallel, then it started performing...

...016 at 07:21:16PM +0100, Alex Crow wrote: > >> I've set up the "DR" side of my cluster to "use mmap = no" and with > >> "private dir" removed from the smb.conf. > > Why do you set "use mmap = no"? > > > >> I have the MooseFS guys on the case as well. Should I put them in touch > >> with you or vice/versa? > > MooseFS should not have any business at all in tdb files. If you still > > find tdb files used on MooseFS, you should investigate your > > configuration and modify it such that tdb files...

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 02:22:12PM +0100, Alex Crow wrote: > At the moment we're pretty happy with the Samba side of things. I > did wonder if there was any help that you kind chaps might be able > to give to the MooseFS guys if they need it (they've not asked yet > but I've suggested they might be able to). Overall it's working The main hint I would like to give to the MooseFS developers is to get ping_pong -rw working. If you need any assistance in setting that up and getting arguments on why this...

...- mostly random reads or linear reads/writes? - average size of reads and writes? - how many read/writes on average for a specific mailbox size? Anyone do any measurements of this kind? Alternatively, does anyone have any experience with other redundant storage options? Im thinking things like MooseFS, DRBD, etc? regards, Cor

...un an XFS in a file mounted via -o loop? The file size is about 20 TB and it resides in a larger XFS filesystem residing on a disk. That filesystem's size is about 25 TB. What sort of degradation should one expect under that sort of scenario? The reason I am asking is that I am trying to run a MooseFS chunkserver in that filesystem-in-a-file and looks like I am getting some pretty bad delays. Thanks. Boris.

...r, Thanks for the update. Initially, I also thought of deploying Ceph but ceph is quite difficult to set-up and manage. Moreover, it's also hardware demanding. I think it's most suitable for a very large set-up with hundreds of clients. What do you think of MooseFS ? Have you or anyone else tried MooseFS. If yes, how was its performance? Thanks, Gagan On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 1:45?PM Alexander Schreiber <als at thangorodrim.ch> wrote: > On Thu, Apr 17, 2025 at 09:40:08AM +0530, gagan tiwari wrote: > > Hi Guys, > > We...

...ing) one wants, the more powerful hardware one has to provide, as usual. My nodes are Intel D-1521 with 64G of (ECC, of course) RAM and Connect-X 4 cards running at 10 GBit and storage on HDDs which provide reasonable performance for my needs - not a HPC setup, of course. > What do you think of MooseFS ? Have you or anyone else tried MooseFS. If > yes, how was its performance? Last time I looked, MooseFS needs a commercial license for the full feature set (e.g. highly available metadata (_that_ is not negotiable!), erasure oding, Windows clients) which killed it for my non-commercial use ca...

...etely. >> >> Even if the only file we have to have on the cluster FS (which now >> seems to be down solely to the ctdb lock file), I'm still worried >> what these failures mean: >> >> 1) does the -rw (without -m) test suggest any problems with the >> MooseFS FS I'm serving files to users from? >> 2) does the mmap test failure mean I should not even have my CTDB >> lock file on MooseFS? >> 3) Do the inconsistent reports from a ping_pong -rw test show there >> is a major problem with MooseFS as the underlying FS for Samba &...