search for: nolockinode

Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "nolockinode".

2018 Sep 19
3
CTDB potential locking issue
...". If > that is needed for Cephfs then the fsname_norootdir option might not be > appropriate. > This was a leftover from a short-lived experiment with OCFS2 where I think it was required. I think CephFS should be fine with fsname. > > You could also consider using the fileid:nolockinode hack if it is > appropriate. > > You should definitely read vfs_fileid(8) before using either of these > options. > I'll have a read. Thanks again for your assistance. > > Although clustering has obvious benefits, it doesn't come for > free. Dealing with contentio...
2018 Sep 19
0
CTDB potential locking issue
...l files = yes The share is accessed by the Windows machines to install software, read configs etc. I would have thought the share being read only would preclude this type of locking behaviour? Do I need to explicitly disable locking in the share definition? I suppose I could still use the fileid:nolockinode for this file, do I just add fileid:nolockinode = *inodenumber *to the global section of my smb.conf? Thanks, David On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 7:00 PM David C <dcsysengineer at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Martin > > Many thanks for the detailed response. A few follow-ups inline: &gt...
2018 Sep 19
0
CTDB potential locking issue
...rency there, then you could think about using the fileid:algorithm = fsname_norootdir option. However, I note you're using "fileid:algorithm = fsid". If that is needed for Cephfs then the fsname_norootdir option might not be appropriate. You could also consider using the fileid:nolockinode hack if it is appropriate. You should definitely read vfs_fileid(8) before using either of these options. Although clustering has obvious benefits, it doesn't come for free. Dealing with contention can be tricky... :-) peace & happiness, martin
2018 Sep 18
4
CTDB potential locking issue
Hi All I have a newly implemented two node CTDB cluster running on CentOS 7, Samba 4.7.1 The node network is a direct 1Gb link Storage is Cephfs ctdb status is OK It seems to be running well so far but I'm frequently seeing the following in my log.smbd: [2018/09/18 19:16:15.897742, 0] > ../source3/lib/dbwrap/dbwrap_ctdb.c:1207(fetch_locked_internal) > db_ctdb_fetch_locked for