search for: ssd1

...ashed hypervisor. We were able to remove locks from "regular files", but it doesn't seem possible to remove locks from shards. We are running GlusterFS 3.8.15 on all nodes. Here is part of statedump that shows shard having active lock on crashed node: [xlator.features.locks.zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-locks.inode] path=/.shard/75353c17-d6b8-485d-9baf-fd6c700e39a1.21 mandatory=0 inodelk-count=1 lock-dump.domain.domain=zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-replicate-0:metadata lock-dump.domain.domain=zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-replicate-0:self-heal lock-dump.domain.domain=zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-replicate-0 inodelk.inode...

...as been running now for over 16 hours without any information. In statedump I can see that storage nodes have locks on files and some of those are blocked. Ie. Here again it says that ovirt8z2 is having active lock even ovirt8z2 crashed after the lock was granted.: [xlator.features.locks.zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-locks.inode] path=/.shard/3d55f8cc-cda9-489a-b0a3-fd0f43d67876.27 mandatory=0 inodelk-count=3 lock-dump.domain.domain=zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-replicate-0:self-heal inodelk.inodelk[0](ACTIVE)=type=WRITE, whence=0, start=0, len=0, pid = 18446744073709551610, owner=d0c6d857a87f0000, client=0x7f885...

...locks on files and some >> of those >> are blocked. Ie. Here again it says that ovirt8z2 is >> having active >> lock even ovirt8z2 crashed after the lock was granted.: >> >> [xlator.features.locks.zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-locks.inode] >> path=/.shard/3d55f8cc-cda9-489a-b0a3-fd0f43d67876.27 >> mandatory=0 >> inodelk-count=3 >> lock-dump.domain.domain=zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-replicate-0:self- >> heal >> inodelk.inodelk[0...

...n. In statedump >>> I can see that storage nodes have locks on files and some of those >>> are blocked. Ie. Here again it says that ovirt8z2 is having active >>> lock even ovirt8z2 crashed after the lock was granted.: >>> >>> [xlator.features.locks.zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-locks.inode] >>> path=/.shard/3d55f8cc-cda9-489a-b0a3-fd0f43d67876.27 >>> mandatory=0 >>> inodelk-count=3 >>> lock-dump.domain.domain=zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-replicate-0:self-heal >>> inodelk.inodelk[0](ACTIVE)=type=WRITE, whence=0, start=0, len=0, pi...

...for over 16 hours without any information. > In statedump I can see that storage nodes have locks on files and some of > those are blocked. Ie. Here again it says that ovirt8z2 is having active > lock even ovirt8z2 crashed after the lock was granted.: > > [xlator.features.locks.zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-locks.inode] > path=/.shard/3d55f8cc-cda9-489a-b0a3-fd0f43d67876.27 > mandatory=0 > inodelk-count=3 > lock-dump.domain.domain=zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-replicate-0:self-heal > inodelk.inodelk[0](ACTIVE)=type=WRITE, whence=0, start=0, len=0, pid = > 18446744073709551610, owner=d0c...

...that storage nodes have locks on files and some > of those > are blocked. Ie. Here again it says that ovirt8z2 is > having active > lock even ovirt8z2 crashed after the lock was granted.: > > [xlator.features.locks.zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-locks.inode] > path=/.shard/3d55f8cc-cda9-489a-b0a3-fd0f43d67876.27 > mandatory=0 > inodelk-count=3 > lock-dump.domain.domain=zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-replicate-0:self-heal > inodelk.inodelk[0](ACTIVE)=type=WRITE, whence=0...

...t;>>> some >>>> of those >>>> are blocked. Ie. Here again it says that ovirt8z2 is >>>> having active >>>> lock even ovirt8z2 crashed after the lock was >>>> granted.: >>>> >>>> [xlator.features.locks.zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-locks.inode] >>>> path=/.shard/3d55f8cc-cda9-489a-b0a3-fd0f43d67876.27 >>>> mandatory=0 >>>> inodelk-count=3 >>>> >>>> lock-dump.domain.domain=zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-replicate-0:self-heal >>>> inodelk.inodelk[0](ACTIVE)=typ...

...odes have locks on files and >>> some >>> of those >>> are blocked. Ie. Here again it says that ovirt8z2 is >>> having active >>> lock even ovirt8z2 crashed after the lock was >>> granted.: >>> >>> [xlator.features.locks.zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-locks.inode] >>> path=/.shard/3d55f8cc-cda9-489a-b0a3-fd0f43d67876.27 >>> mandatory=0 >>> inodelk-count=3 >>> >>> lock-dump.domain.domain=zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-replicate-0:self-heal >>> inodelk.inodelk[0](ACTIVE)=type=WRITE, whence=0, >...

...>>> of those >>>>> are blocked. Ie. Here again it says that ovirt8z2 is >>>>> having active >>>>> lock even ovirt8z2 crashed after the lock was >>>>> granted.: >>>>> >>>>> [xlator.features.locks.zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-locks.inode] >>>>> path=/.shard/3d55f8cc-cda9-489a-b0a3-fd0f43d67876.27 >>>>> mandatory=0 >>>>> inodelk-count=3 >>>>> >>>>> lock-dump.domain.domain=zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-replicate-0:self-heal >>>>> inodel...

On 29 Jan 2018 10:50 am, "Samuli Heinonen" <samppah at neutraali.net> wrote: Hi! Yes, thank you for asking. I found out this line in the production environment: lgetxattr("/tmp/zone2-ssd1-vmstor1.s6jvPu//.shard/f349ffbd- a423-4fb2-b83c-2d1d5e78e1fb.32", "glusterfs.clrlk.tinode.kblocked", 0x7f2d7c4379f0, 4096) = -1 EPERM (Operation not permitted) I was expecting .kall instead of .blocked, did you change the cli to kind blocked? And this one in test environment (wit...

...hout any information. In statedump >> I can see that storage nodes have locks on files and some of those >> are blocked. Ie. Here again it says that ovirt8z2 is having active >> lock even ovirt8z2 crashed after the lock was granted.: >> >> [xlator.features.locks.zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-locks.inode] >> path=/.shard/3d55f8cc-cda9-489a-b0a3-fd0f43d67876.27 >> mandatory=0 >> inodelk-count=3 >> lock-dump.domain.domain=zone2-ssd1-vmstor1-replicate-0:self-heal >> inodelk.inodelk[0](ACTIVE)=type=WRITE, whence=0, start=0, len=0, pid >> = 1844674...

...kirjoitti 29.01.2018 07:32: > On 29 Jan 2018 10:50 am, "Samuli Heinonen" <samppah at neutraali.net> > wrote: > >> Hi! >> >> Yes, thank you for asking. I found out this line in the production >> environment: >> > lgetxattr("/tmp/zone2-ssd1-vmstor1.s6jvPu//.shard/f349ffbd-a423-4fb2-b83c-2d1d5e78e1fb.32", >> "glusterfs.clrlk.tinode.kblocked", 0x7f2d7c4379f0, 4096) = -1 EPERM >> (Operation not permitted) > > I was expecting .kall instead of .blocked, > did you change the cli to kind blocked? > Y...

Hi, When deploying ZFS in cluster environment it would be nice to be able to have some SSDs as local drives (not on SAN) and when pool switches over to the other node zfs would pick up the node''s local disk drives as L2ARC. To better clarify what I mean lets assume there is a 2-node cluster with 1sx 2540 disk array. Now lets put 4x SSDs in each node (as internal/local drives). Now

...mething wrong in my coding ii) after obtain F value, how i can proceed to obtain type I error rate? h=0 g=0 n=15 alpha=0.1 k=floor(alpha*n)+1 r=k-(alpha*n) i=k+1 m=n-k J=2 trim1<-rep(NA,asim) trim2<-rep(NA,asim) pw<-rep(NA,asim) qw<-rep(NA,asim) px<-rep(NA,asim) qx<-rep(NA,asim) ssd1<-rep(NA,asim) ssd2<-rep(NA,asim) madN1<-rep(NA,asim) madN2<-rep(NA,asim) lo.w<-rep(NA,asim) up.w<-rep(NA,asim) lo.x<-rep(NA,asim) up.x<-rep(NA,asim) hw<-rep(NA,asim) hx<-rep(NA,asim) xbar.t<-rep(NA,asim) num<-rep(NA,asim) df2<-rep(NA,asim) denom<-rep(NA,asi...

...at2[n2-k2+1] u3=(1-r3)*mat3[n3-k3]+r3*mat3[n3-k3+1] u4=(1-r4)*mat4[n4-k4]+r4*mat4[n4-k4+1] win1=1/n1* (sum(mat1[e1:f1])+k1*(x1+u1)) win2=1/n2* (sum(mat2[e2:f2])+k2*(x2+u2)) win3=1/n3* (sum(mat3[e3:f3])+k3*(x3+u3)) win4=1/n4* (sum(mat4[e4:f4])+k4*(x4+u4)) ## g-winsorized sum of squared deviations ssd1=sum((mat1[e1:f1]-win1)^2) + k1*((mat1[k1+1]-win1)^2 + (mat1[n1-k1]-win1)^2) ssd2=sum((mat2[e2:f2]-win2)^2) + k2*((mat2[k2+1]-win2)^2 + (mat2[n2-k2]-win2)^2) ssd3=sum((mat3[e3:f3]-win3)^2) + k3*((mat3[k3+1]-win3)^2 + (mat3[n3-k3]-win3)^2) ssd4=sum((mat4[e4:f4]-win4)^2) + k4*((mat4[k4+1]-win4)^2 + (m...

...> > win1=1/n1* (sum(mat1[e1:f1])+k1*(x1+u1)) > win2=1/n2* (sum(mat2[e2:f2])+k2*(x2+u2)) > win3=1/n3* (sum(mat3[e3:f3])+k3*(x3+u3)) > win4=1/n4* (sum(mat4[e4:f4])+k4*(x4+u4)) > > ## g-winsorized sum of squared deviations > > ssd1=sum((mat1[e1:f1]-win1)^2) + k1*((mat1[k1+1]-win1)^2 + > (mat1[n1-k1]-win1)^2) > ssd2=sum((mat2[e2:f2]-win2)^2) + k2*((mat2[k2+1]-win2)^2 + > (mat2[n2-k2]-win2)^2) > ssd3=sum((mat3[e3:f3]-win3)^2) + k3*((mat3[k3+1]-win3)^2 + > (mat3[n3-k3]-win3)...

...e unscaled covariance matrix and estVar. anova.mlm, anova.mlmlist, drop1.mlm, add1.mlm These can (seemingly...) be obtained by relatively small modifications of their lm counterparts. The actual test calculations need to be excised from summary.manova (generalize? e.g. mvlin.test(SSD1, SSD2, method="Pillai")). It should be possible to wedge in tests under sphericity assumptions (with Greenhouse-Geisser and Huynh-Feldt corrections), as well as transformation/conditioning matrices (see below). A more radical idea is to say that these are all different k...