similar to: Lost OSTs, remounted, now /proc/fs/lustre/obdfilter/$UUID/ is empty

Hi! We''ve started to poke and prod at Lustre 1.6.4.1, and it seems to mostly work (we haven''t had it OOPS on us yet like the earlier 1.6-versions did). However, we had this weird incident where an active client (it was copying 4GB files and running ls at the time) got evicted by the MDS and all OST''s. After a while logs indicate that it did recover the connection

I''m evaluating lustre. I''m trying what I think is a basic/simple ethernet config. with MDT and OST on the same node. Can someone tell me if the following (~150 second recovery occurring when small 190 GB OST is re-mounted) is expected behavior or if I''m missing something? I thought I would send this and continue with the eval while awaiting a response. I''m using

I''m seeing this error message on one of my OSS''s but not the other three. Any idea what is causing it? Oct 25 13:58:56 oss2 kernel: LustreError: 3228:0:(client.c:519:ptlrpc_import_delay_req()) @@@ IMP_INVALID req at f6b13200 x18040/t0 o101->MGS at MGC192.168.0.200@tcp_0:26 lens 176/184 ref 1 fl Rpc:/0/0 rc 0/0 Oct 25 13:58:56 oss2 kernel: LustreError:

Dear All, Yesterday evening or cluster has stopped. Two of our nodes tried to take the resource from each other, they haven''t seen the other side, if I saw well. I stopped heartbeat, resources, start it again, and back to online, worked fine. This morning I saw this in logs: Feb 22 03:25:07 node4 kernel: Lustre: 7:0:(linux-debug.c:98:libcfs_run_upcall()) Invoked LNET upcall

OK, so our old MDS had hardware issues so I configured a new MGS / MDS on a VM (this is a backup lustre filesystem and I wanted to separate the MGS / MDS from OSS of the previous), and then did this: For example: mount -t ldiskfs /dev/old /mnt/ost_old mount -t ldiskfs /dev/new /mnt/ost_new rsync -aSv /mnt/ost_old/ /mnt/ost_new # note trailing slash on ost_old/ If you are unable to connect both

There are references to running fsck on the lustre OSTs after a crash or power failure. However, after downloading the ClusterFS e2fsprogs and building them, e2fsck does not recognize our ldiskfs- based OSTs. Is there a way to fsck the ldiskfs-based OSTs? Thanks, Charlie Taylor UF HPC Center

Chris, Perhaps you need to perform some write_conf like command. I''m not sure if this is needed in 1.6 or not. Shane ----- Original Message ----- From: lustre-discuss-bounces at lists.lustre.org <lustre-discuss-bounces at lists.lustre.org> To: lustre-discuss <lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org> Sent: Fri Mar 07 12:03:17 2008 Subject: Re: [Lustre-discuss] Multihomed

Some clients have been removed several weeks ago but are still listed in: ls -l /proc/fs/lustre/obdfilter/*/exports/ This was found after tracing back mystery tcp packets to the OSS. Although this is causing no damage, it raises the question of when former clients will be cleared from the OSS. Is there a way to manually remove these exports from the OSS? -- Regards, David

I installed 1 MDS , 2 OSS/OST and 2 Lustre Client. My MDS shows: [code] [root at MDS ~]# lctl list_nids 10.94.214.185 at tcp [root at MDS ~]# [/code] On Lustre Client1: [code] [root at lustreclient1 lustre]# lfs df -h UUID bytes Used Available Use% Mounted on lustre-MDT0000_UUID 4.5G 274.3M 3.9G 6% /mnt/lustre[MDT:0]

I installed 1 MDS , 2 OSS/OST and 2 Lustre Client. My MDS shows: [code] [root at MDS ~]# lctl list_nids 10.94.214.185 at tcp [root at MDS ~]# [/code] On Lustre Client1: [code] [root at lustreclient1 lustre]# lfs df -h UUID bytes Used Available Use% Mounted on lustre-MDT0000_UUID 4.5G 274.3M 3.9G 6% /mnt/lustre[MDT:0] lustre-OST0000_UUID

Hi, everyone, I need some help in figuring out what may have happened here, as newly created files on an OST are being corrupted. I don''t know if this applies to all files written to this OST, or just to files of order 2GB size, but files are definitely being corrupted, with no errors reported by the OSS machine. Let me describe the situation. We had been running Lustre 1.8.4 for

whoops, sent from wrong email address, form right address now: Hello, I am using Lustre 2.4.2 and have an OST that doesn't seem to be written to. When I check the MDS with 'lctl dl' I do not see that OST in the list. However when I check the OSS that OST belongs to I can see it is mounted and up; 0 UP osd-zfs l2-OST0003-osd l2-OST0003-osd_UUID 5 3 UP obdfilter l2-OST0003

Dear, everyone We have stuck with the problem that the OSS connect one dead client or one with changed IP address all the time until we reboot the dead client. From the OSS log message, we can get the information as follows: Jul 7 14:45:07 com01 kernel: Lustre: 12180:0:(socklnd_cb.cLustre: 12180:0:(socklnd_cb.c:915:ksocknal_launch_packet()) No usable routes to 12345-202.Lustre:

Hi, I see some unusual block allocations on my OSTs, and I was wondering if someone could explain to my why, and help me to fix a performance problem. In order to track down a performance issue, I ran the following test: - I reformatted my OSTS (I have 4 OSTs). - I created a 10G file on each OST. - I ran dumpe2fs to see if I had some unusual fragmentation going on. dumpe2fs shows

Afternoon I upgraded our oss''s from 1.8.3 to 1.8.4 on Saturday (due to https://bugzilla.lustre.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22755) and suffered a great deal of pain. We have 30 oss''s of multiple vintages. The basic difference between them is * md on first 20 nodes * 3ware 9650SE ML12 on last 10 nodes After the upgrade to 1.8.4 we were seeing terrible throughput on the nodes with

Hi everyone, I have seen this question here before, but without a very satisfactory answer. One of our half a dozen clients has lost access to a set of OSTs: > lfs osts OBDS:: 0: lustre-OST0000_UUID ACTIVE 1: lustre-OST0001_UUID ACTIVE 2: lustre-OST0002_UUID INACTIVE 3: lustre-OST0003_UUID INACTIVE 4: lustre-OST0004_UUID INACTIVE 5: lustre-OST0005_UUID ACTIVE 6: lustre-OST0006_UUID ACTIVE

Hi all, we use SLES 11 and Lustre 1.8.1.1 + patches and like convert a lustre FS using external journals to one with async journals enabled. Question is whether the procedure: umount <filesystem> on all clients umount <osts> on all OSSes e2fsck <ost-device> on all OSSes for all all OSTs tune2fs -O ^has_journal <ost-device> on all

Our current Lustre servers run the version 1.8.1.1 with the regular ldiskfs. We are looking to expand our Lustre file system with new servers/storage and upgrade to all the lustre servers to 1.8.4 as well at the same time. We would like to make use of the ldiskfs-ext4 on the new servers to use larger OSTs. I just want to confirm the following facts: 1. Is is possible to run different versions

Hi, Our lustre environment is: 2.6.9-55.0.9.EL_lustre.1.6.3smp I would like to change recovery timeout from default value 250s to something longer I tried example from manual: set_timeout <secs> Sets the timeout (obd_timeout) for a server to wait before failing recovery. We performed that experiment on our test lustre installation with one OST. storage02 is our OSS [root at

Hi, i just want to know whether there are any alternative file systems for HP SFS. I heard that there is Cluster Gateway from Polyserve. Can anybody plz help me in finding more abt this Cluster Gateway. Thanks and Regards, Ashok Bharat -----Original Message----- From: lustre-discuss-bounces at lists.lustre.org on behalf of lustre-discuss-request at lists.lustre.org Sent: Tue 2/12/2008 3:18 AM