On Monday 25 June 2007 20:15:09 Nathaniel Rutman wrote:
> Bernd Schubert wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm just testing how well the upgrades do work and somehow I have a
> > problem:
> >
> > On Ost1:
> > ========
> > [  271.985901] LustreError: Trying to start OBD lustre-OST0001_UUID using
> > the wrong disk ost1_UUID. Were the /dev/ assignments rearranged?
>
> Well, that's the problem.  Note the uuid is missing from the tunefs on
> the OST, but not the MDS.
> This a safety check to make sure you're using the right disk; it should
> have been found when you did the initial tunefs upgrade to 1.6.
> You can erase the last_rcvd file manually out the of OST disk to get
> around this.

I think I figured out how this problem came up at all. When I did run 
tunefs.lustre for the first time it told I have to specify the index, since 
it couldn't detect the index itself. Following the common ost-numeration I 
told tunefs.lustre OST1 has index=1 and OST2 has index=2. Seems I should have 
specified index=0 and index=1, respectively.

After the deleting the last_rcvd files I could mount on the servers and on the 
clients, but on the clients the files didn't appear properly and dmesg told 
me OST0000 is missing for a file.

For the archives if someone should run into this in the future:
To get around this I had to run "tunefs.lustre --writeconf" on all nodes and 
to delete the last_rcvd files on the OST nodes. To make sure there's no 
corruption I also did run e2fsck on all systems. Specifying --writeconf also 
allows to correct an already given ost index.

I still do not understand why tunefs.lustre couldn't detect the indices itslf. 
The filesystems have been created with tools from lustre-1.4.9 and with 
kernel modules from lustre-1.4.10.

Cheers,
Bernd

-- 
Bernd Schubert
Q-Leap Networks GmbH

_______________________________________________
Lustre-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss

Reply via email to