If there is any means for feedback, I really think that anything that causes a crash of mmfsd is absolutely cause to send a notice. Regardless of data corruption, it makes the software unusable in production under certain circumstances. There was a large customer impact at our site. We have a reproducible case if it is useful. One customer workload crashed every time, though it took almost a full day to get to that point so you can imagine the time wasted.
> On Aug 21, 2019, at 1:20 PM, IBM Spectrum Scale <[email protected]> wrote: > > To my knowledge there has been no notification sent regarding this problem. > Generally we only notify customers about problems that impact file system > data corruption or data loss. This problem does cause the GPFS instance to > abort and restart (assert) but it does not impact file system data. It seems > in your case you may have been encountering the problem frequently. > > Regards, The Spectrum Scale (GPFS) team > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > If you feel that your question can benefit other users of Spectrum Scale > (GPFS), then please post it to the public IBM developerWroks Forum at > https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/forums/html/forum?id=11111111-0000-0000-0000-000000000479. > > > If your query concerns a potential software error in Spectrum Scale (GPFS) > and you have an IBM software maintenance contract please contact > 1-800-237-5511 in the United States or your local IBM Service Center in other > countries. > > The forum is informally monitored as time permits and should not be used for > priority messages to the Spectrum Scale (GPFS) team. > > > > From: Ryan Novosielski <[email protected]> > To: gpfsug main discussion list <[email protected]> > Date: 08/21/2019 01:14 PM > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [gpfsug-discuss] mmfsd segfault/signal 6 on > dirop.C:4548 in GPFS 5.0.2.x > Sent by: [email protected] > > > > Has there been any official notification of this one? I can’t see anything > about it anyplace other than in my support ticket. > > -- > ____ > || \\UTGERS, > |---------------------------*O*--------------------------- > ||_// the State | Ryan Novosielski - > [email protected] > || \\ University | Sr. Technologist - 973/972.0922 (2x0922) ~*~ RBHS Campus > || \\ of NJ | Office of Advanced Research Computing - > MSB C630, Newark > `' > > > On Aug 21, 2019, at 1:10 PM, IBM Spectrum Scale <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > As was noted this problem is fixed in the Spectrum Scale 5.0.3 release > > stream. Regarding the version number format of 5.0.2.0/1 I assume that it > > is meant to convey version 5.0.2 efix 1. > > > > Regards, The Spectrum Scale (GPFS) team > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > If you feel that your question can benefit other users of Spectrum Scale > > (GPFS), then please post it to the public IBM developerWroks Forum at > > https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/forums/html/forum?id=11111111-0000-0000-0000-000000000479. > > > > > > If your query concerns a potential software error in Spectrum Scale (GPFS) > > and you have an IBM software maintenance contract please contact > > 1-800-237-5511 in the United States or your local IBM Service Center in > > other countries. > > > > The forum is informally monitored as time permits and should not be used > > for priority messages to the Spectrum Scale (GPFS) team. > > > > > > > > From: Ryan Novosielski <[email protected]> > > To: gpfsug main discussion list <[email protected]> > > Date: 08/21/2019 12:04 PM > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [gpfsug-discuss] mmfsd segfault/signal 6 on > > dirop.C:4548 in GPFS 5.0.2.x > > Sent by: [email protected] > > > > > > > > I posted this on Slack, but it’s serious enough that I want to make sure > > everyone sees it. Does anyone, from IBM or otherwise, have any more > > information about this/whether it was even announced anyplace? Thanks! > > > > A little late, but we ran into a relatively serious problem at our site > > with 5.0.2.3 at our site. The symptom is a mmfsd crash/segfault related to > > fs/dirop.C:4548. We ran into this sporadically, but it was repeatable on > > the problem workload. From IBM Support: > > > > 2. This is a known defect. > > The problem has been fixed through > > D.1073563: CTM_A_XW_FOR_DATA_IN_INODE related assert in DirLTE::lock > > A companion fix is > > D.1073753: Assert that the lock mode in DirLTE::lock is strong enough > > > > > > The rep further said "It's not an APAR since it's found in internal > > testing. It's an internal function at a place it should not assert but a > > part of the condition as the code path is specific to the > > DIR_UPDATE_LOCKMODE optimization code... The assert was meant for certain > > file creation code path, but the condition wasn't set strictly for that > > code path that some other code path could also run into the assert. So we > > cannot predict on which node it would happen.” > > > > The fix was setting disableAssert="dirop.C:4548, which can be done live. > > Anyone seen anything else about this anyplace? The bug is fixed in 5.0.3.x > > and was introduced in 5.0.2.0/1 (not sure what this version number means; > > I’ve seen them listed X.X.X.X.X.X, X.X.X-X.X, and others). > > > > -- > > ____ > > || \\UTGERS, > > |---------------------------*O*--------------------------- > > ||_// the State | Ryan Novosielski - > > [email protected] > > || \\ University | Sr. Technologist - 973/972.0922 (2x0922) ~*~ RBHS Campus > > || \\ of NJ | Office of Advanced Research Computing - > > MSB C630, Newark > > `' > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 _______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
