We see it on all four of the nodes, and yet we did some getent passwd/getent 
group stuff on them to verify that identity is working OK.

Simon

From: 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
 on behalf of Bill Pappas <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: 
"[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Monday, 19 December 2016 at 15:59
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] SMB issues



What I would do is when you identify this issue again, determine which IP 
address (which samba server) is serving up the CIFS share.  Then as root, log 
on to that samna node and typr "id <username>" for the user which has this 
issue.  Are they in all the security groups you'd expect, in particular, the 
group required to access the folder in question?



Bill Pappas

901-619-0585

[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>


[1466780990050_DSTlogo.png]


[http://www.prweb.com/releases/2016/06/prweb13504050.htm]

http://www.prweb.com/releases/2016/06/prweb13504050.htm


________________________________
From: 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
 on behalf of 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 9:41 AM
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: gpfsug-discuss Digest, Vol 59, Issue 40

Send gpfsug-discuss mailing list submissions to
        
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

You can reach the person managing the list at
        
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of gpfsug-discuss digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. SMB issues (Simon Thompson (Research Computing - IT Services))
   2. Re: Tiers (Buterbaugh, Kevin L)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 15:36:50 +0000
From: "Simon Thompson (Research Computing - IT Services)"
        <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
To: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
        
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: [gpfsug-discuss] SMB issues
Message-ID: 
<d47daf11.34457%[email protected]<mailto:d47daf11.34457%[email protected]>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Hi All,

We upgraded to 4.2.2.0 last week as well as to
gpfs.smb-4.4.6_gpfs_8-1.el7.x86_64.rpm from the 4.2.2.0 protocols bundle.

We've since been getting random users reporting that they get access
denied errors when trying to access folders. Some seem to work fine and
others not, but it seems to vary and change by user (for example this
morning, I could see all my folders fine, but later I could only see
some). From my Mac connecting to the SMB shares, I could connect fine to
the share, but couldn't list files in the folder (I guess this is what
users were seeing from Windows as access denied).

In the log.smbd, we are seeing errors such as this:

[2016/12/19 15:20:40.649580,  0]
../source3/lib/sysquotas.c:457(sys_get_quota)
  sys_path_to_bdev() failed for path [FOLDERNAME_HERE]!



Reverting to the previous version of SMB we were running
(gpfs.smb-4.3.9_gpfs_21-1.el7.x86_64), the problems go away.

Before I log a PMR, has anyone else seen this behaviour or have any
suggestions?

Thanks

Simon



------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2016 15:40:50 +0000
From: "Buterbaugh, Kevin L" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
To: gpfsug main discussion list 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Tiers
Message-ID: 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Hi Brian,

We?re probably an outlier on this (Bob?s case is probably much more typical) 
but we can get away with doing weekly migrations based on file atime.  Some 
thoughts:

1.  absolutely use QOS!  It?s one of the best things IBM has ever added to GPFS.
2.  personally, I limit even my capacity pool to no more than 98% capacity.  I 
just don?t think it?s a good idea to 100% fill anything.
3.  if you do use anything like atime or mtime as your criteria, don?t forget 
to have a rule to move stuff back from the capacity pool if it?s now being used.
4.  we also help manage a DDN device and there they do also implement a rule to 
move stuff if the ?fast? pool exceeds a certain threshold ? but they use file 
size as the weight.  Not saying that?s right or wrong, it?s just another 
approach.

HTHAL?

Kevin

On Dec 19, 2016, at 9:25 AM, Oesterlin, Robert 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>>
 wrote:

I tend to do migration based on ?file heat?, moving the least active files to 
HDD and more active to SSD. Something simple like this:

rule grpdef GROUP POOL gpool IS ssd LIMIT(75) THEN disk
rule repack
  MIGRATE FROM POOL gpool TO POOL gpool
  WEIGHT(FILE_HEAT)

Bob Oesterlin
Sr Principal Storage Engineer, Nuance




From: 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>>
 on behalf of Brian Marshall 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: gpfsug main discussion list 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Monday, December 19, 2016 at 9:15 AM
To: gpfsug main discussion list 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Tiers

We are in very similar situation.  VT - ARC has a layer of SSD for metadata 
only,  another layer of SSD for "hot" data, and a layer of 8TB HDDs for 
capacity.   We just now in the process of getting it all into production.

On this topic:

What is everyone's favorite migration policy to move data from SSD to HDD (and 
vice versa)?

Do you nightly move large/old files to HDD or wait until the fast tier hit some 
capacity limit?

Do you use QOS to limit the migration from SSD to HDD i.e. try not to kill the 
file system with migration work?


Thanks,
Brian Marshall

On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 4:25 PM, Buterbaugh, Kevin L 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>>
 wrote:
Hi Mark,

We just use an 8 Gb FC SAN.  For the data pool we typically have a dual 
active-active controller storage array fronting two big RAID 6 LUNs and 1 RAID 
1 (for /home).  For the capacity pool, it might be the same exact model of 
controller, but the two controllers are now fronting that whole 60-bay array.

But our users tend to have more modest performance needs than most?

Kevin

On Dec 15, 2016, at 3:19 PM, 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
 wrote:

Kevin, out of curiosity, what type of disk does your data pool use?  SAS or 
just some SAN attached system?

From: 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>>
 on behalf of "Buterbaugh, Kevin L" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: gpfsug main discussion list 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Thursday, December 15, 2016 at 2:47 PM
To: gpfsug main discussion list 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Tiers

Hi Mark,

We?re a ?traditional? university HPC center with a very untraditional policy on 
our scratch filesystem ? we don?t purge it and we sell quota there.  
Ultimately, a lot of that disk space is taken up by stuff that, let?s just say, 
isn?t exactly in active use.

So what we?ve done, for example, is buy a 60-bay storage array and stuff it 
with 8 TB drives.  It wouldn?t offer good enough performance for actively used 
files, but we use GPFS policies to migrate files to the ?capacity? pool based 
on file atime.  So we have 3 pools:

1.  the system pool with metadata only (on SSDs)
2.  the data pool, which is where actively used files are stored and which 
offers decent performance
3.  the capacity pool, for data which hasn?t been accessed ?recently?, and 
which is on slower storage

I would imagine others do similar things.  HTHAL?

Kevin

On Dec 15, 2016, at 2:32 PM, 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>
 wrote:

Just curious how many of you out there deploy SS with various tiers?  It seems 
like a lot are doing the system pool with SSD?s but do you routinely have 
clusters that have more than system pool and one more tier?

I know if you are doing Archive in connection that?s an obvious choice for 
another tier but I?m struggling with knowing why someone needs more than two 
tiers really.

I?ve read all the fine manuals as to how to do such a thing and some of the 
marketing as to maybe why.  I?m still scratching my head on this though.  In 
fact, my understanding is in the ESS there isn?t any different pools (tiers) as 
it?s all NL-SAS or SSD (DF150, etc).

It does make sense to me know with TCT and I could create an ILM policy to get 
some of my data into the cloud.

But in the real world I would like to know what yall do in this regard.


Thanks

Mark

This message (including any attachments) is intended only for the use of the 
individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that 
is non-public, proprietary, privileged, confidential, and exempt from 
disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are 
hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. This message may be viewed by parties at 
Sirius Computer Solutions other than those named in the message header. This 
message does not contain an official representation of Sirius Computer 
Solutions. If you have received this communication in error, notify Sirius 
Computer Solutions immediately and (i) destroy this message if a facsimile or 
(ii) delete this message immediately if this is an electronic communication. 
Thank you.
Sirius Computer 
Solutions<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.siriuscom.com_&d=DgMFaQ&c=djjh8EKwHtOepW4Bjau0lKhLlu-DxM1dlgP0rrLsOzY&r=LPDewt1Z4o9eKc86MXmhqX-45Cz1yz1ylYELF9olLKU&m=2V9MbsY4SgTRmE8kIq6GQAq0owTDl_XMhRmx6pH61Os&s=ApfdK36fjx8EPle4P0_HHozWlQgTEFSkvigVGHY-94U&e=>
_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at 
spectrumscale.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__spectrumscale.org_&d=DgMFaQ&c=djjh8EKwHtOepW4Bjau0lKhLlu-DxM1dlgP0rrLsOzY&r=LPDewt1Z4o9eKc86MXmhqX-45Cz1yz1ylYELF9olLKU&m=2V9MbsY4SgTRmE8kIq6GQAq0owTDl_XMhRmx6pH61Os&s=rtkufzJTlSLEaFc-2qGxOm33u9-5xYdReXP2nuL6KLM&e=>
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gpfsug.org_mailman_listinfo_gpfsug-2Ddiscuss&d=DgMFaQ&c=djjh8EKwHtOepW4Bjau0lKhLlu-DxM1dlgP0rrLsOzY&r=LPDewt1Z4o9eKc86MXmhqX-45Cz1yz1ylYELF9olLKU&m=2V9MbsY4SgTRmE8kIq6GQAq0owTDl_XMhRmx6pH61Os&s=bU09EKmlGWP0q6ENn-SjisUJ3b-BFCitjbUPWfLMhUc&e=>

_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at 
spectrumscale.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__spectrumscale.org_&d=DgMFaQ&c=djjh8EKwHtOepW4Bjau0lKhLlu-DxM1dlgP0rrLsOzY&r=LPDewt1Z4o9eKc86MXmhqX-45Cz1yz1ylYELF9olLKU&m=2V9MbsY4SgTRmE8kIq6GQAq0owTDl_XMhRmx6pH61Os&s=rtkufzJTlSLEaFc-2qGxOm33u9-5xYdReXP2nuL6KLM&e=>
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gpfsug.org_mailman_listinfo_gpfsug-2Ddiscuss&d=DgMFaQ&c=djjh8EKwHtOepW4Bjau0lKhLlu-DxM1dlgP0rrLsOzY&r=LPDewt1Z4o9eKc86MXmhqX-45Cz1yz1ylYELF9olLKU&m=2V9MbsY4SgTRmE8kIq6GQAq0owTDl_XMhRmx6pH61Os&s=bU09EKmlGWP0q6ENn-SjisUJ3b-BFCitjbUPWfLMhUc&e=>


_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at 
spectrumscale.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__spectrumscale.org&d=DgMFaQ&c=djjh8EKwHtOepW4Bjau0lKhLlu-DxM1dlgP0rrLsOzY&r=LPDewt1Z4o9eKc86MXmhqX-45Cz1yz1ylYELF9olLKU&m=2V9MbsY4SgTRmE8kIq6GQAq0owTDl_XMhRmx6pH61Os&s=bZPT0Z1zNEbNctrugxAQ_G6wpNfuJFzNpfawDym_G9U&e=>
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gpfsug.org_mailman_listinfo_gpfsug-2Ddiscuss&d=DgMFaQ&c=djjh8EKwHtOepW4Bjau0lKhLlu-DxM1dlgP0rrLsOzY&r=LPDewt1Z4o9eKc86MXmhqX-45Cz1yz1ylYELF9olLKU&m=2V9MbsY4SgTRmE8kIq6GQAq0owTDl_XMhRmx6pH61Os&s=bU09EKmlGWP0q6ENn-SjisUJ3b-BFCitjbUPWfLMhUc&e=>

_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org<http://spectrumscale.org/>
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss/attachments/20161219/0059c648/attachment.html>

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss


End of gpfsug-discuss Digest, Vol 59, Issue 40
**********************************************
_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

Reply via email to