Hi Norbert, thanks a lot, it worked. I tried the same before for the same rules, but it did not work. Now I realized that this was because remaining disk space and metadata was even smaller than when I checked first time, so nothing changed.
Thanks a lot for your help, Marc _________________________________________ Paul Scherrer Institut High Performance Computing Marc Caubet Serrabou WHGA/019A 5232 Villigen PSI Switzerland Telephone: +41 56 310 46 67 E-Mail: [email protected] ________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Norbert Schuld [[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2018 10:00 AM To: gpfsug main discussion list Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] Change pool-[meta]data_high_warn thresholds Hi, assuming 4.2.3 code level this can be done by deleting and recreating the rule with changed settings: # mmhealth thresholds list ### Threshold Rules ### rule_name metric error warn direction filterBy groupBy sensitivity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- InodeCapUtil_Rule Fileset_inode 90.0 80.0 high gpfs_cluster_name,gpfs_fs_name,gpfs_fset_name 300 MetaDataCapUtil_Rule MetaDataPool_capUtil 90.0 80.0 high gpfs_cluster_name,gpfs_fs_name,gpfs_diskpool_name 300 DataCapUtil_Rule DataPool_capUtil 90.0 80.0 high gpfs_cluster_name,gpfs_fs_name,gpfs_diskpool_name 300 MemFree_Rule mem_memfree 50000 100000 low node 300 # mmhealth thresholds delete MetaDataCapUtil_Rule The rule(s) was(were) deleted successfully # mmhealth thresholds add MetaDataPool_capUtil --errorlevel 95.0 --warnlevel 85.0 --direction high --sensitivity 300 --name MetaDataCapUtil_Rule --groupby gpfs_cluster_name,gpfs_fs_name,gpfs_diskpool_name # mmhealth thresholds list ### Threshold Rules ### rule_name metric error warn direction filterBy groupBy sensitivity -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- InodeCapUtil_Rule Fileset_inode 90.0 80.0 high gpfs_cluster_name,gpfs_fs_name,gpfs_fset_name 300 MemFree_Rule mem_memfree 50000 100000 low node 300 DataCapUtil_Rule DataPool_capUtil 90.0 80.0 high gpfs_cluster_name,gpfs_fs_name,gpfs_diskpool_name 300 MetaDataCapUtil_Rule MetaDataPool_capUtil 95.0 85.0 high gpfs_cluster_name,gpfs_fs_name,gpfs_diskpool_name 300 Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards Norbert Schuld IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH / Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martina Koederitz /Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294 [Inactive hide details for "Caubet Serrabou Marc (PSI)" ---05/06/2018 13:45:35---Dear all, we have a small cluster which is repo]"Caubet Serrabou Marc (PSI)" ---05/06/2018 13:45:35---Dear all, we have a small cluster which is reporting the following alarm: From: "Caubet Serrabou Marc (PSI)" <[email protected]> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Date: 05/06/2018 13:45 Subject: [gpfsug-discuss] Change pool-[meta]data_high_warn thresholds Sent by: [email protected] ________________________________ Dear all, we have a small cluster which is reporting the following alarm: # mmhealth event show pool-metadata_high_warn Event Name: pool-metadata_high_warn Event ID: 999719 Description: The pool reached a warning level. Cause: The pool reached a warning level. User Action: Add more capacity to pool or move data to different pool or delete data and/or snapshots. Severity: WARNING State: DEGRADED # mmhealth event show pool-data_high_warn Event Name: pool-data_high_warn Event ID: 999722 Description: The pool reached a warning level. Cause: The pool reached a warning level. User Action: Add more capacity to pool or move data to different pool or delete data and/or snapshots. Severity: WARNING State: DEGRADED Warning threshold for both alarms is 80%, we are at 81%, so alarm is correct. However, I would like to definmmhealth different limits. Is possible to increase it? 'mmhealth thresholds' did not help as these are not supported metrics (unless I am doing something wrong). Another way is to hide this alarm, but I would like to avoid it. Thanks a lot and best regards, _________________________________________ Paul Scherrer Institut High Performance Computing Marc Caubet Serrabou WHGA/019A 5232 Villigen PSI Switzerland Telephone: +41 56 310 46 67 E-Mail: [email protected]_______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
_______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
