> In fact, one of the things that’s kinda surprising to me is that upgrading the SMB portion of CES requires a downtime. Let’s just say that I know for a fact that sernet-samba can be done rolling / live.
I am referring to the open source version of Samba here. That is likely close to
You also have to be careful with network utilization… we have some very hungry
NFS clients in our environment and the NFS traffic can actually DOS other
services that need to use the network links. If you configure GPFS
admin/daemon traffic over the same link as the SMB/NFS traffic then this
there is nothing wrong with running CES on NSD Servers, in fact if all CES
nodes have access to all LUN's of the filesystem thats the fastest possible
configuration as you eliminate 1 network hop.
the challenge is always to do the proper sizing, so you don't run out of
CPU and memory on the nodes
Hi Anderson,
Thanks for the response … however, the scenario you describe below wouldn’t
impact us. We have 8 NSD servers and they can easily provide the needed
performance to native GPFS clients. We could also take a downtime if we ever
did need to expand in the manner described below.
In
Our experience is that CES (at least NFS/ganesha) can easily consume all of
the CPU resources on a system. If you're running it on the same hardware as
your NSD services, then you risk delaying native GPFS I/O requests as well.
We haven't found a great way to limit the amount of resources that
Hi Kevin,
I think one of the reasons is if you need to add or remove nodes from cluster you will start to face the constrains of this kind of solution. Let's say you have a cluster with two nodes and share the same set of LUNs through SAN. And for some reason you need to add more two nodes that
Hi All,
In doing some research, I have come across numerous places (IBM docs,
DeveloperWorks posts, etc.) where it is stated that it is not recommended to
run CES on NSD servers … but I’ve not found any detailed explanation of why not.
I understand that CES, especially if you enable SMB, can
define(is_premigrated,(MISC_ATTRIBUTES LIKE '%M%' AND MISC_ATTRIBUTES NOT
LIKE '%V%'))
define(is_migrated,(MISC_ATTRIBUTES LIKE '%V%'))
define(is_resident,(NOT MISC_ATTRIBUTES LIKE '%M%'))
THESE are good, valid and fairly efficient tests for any files Spectrum
Scale system that has a DMAPI
"Not sure if the V and M misc_attributes are the same for other tape
backends..."
define(is_premigrated,(MISC_ATTRIBUTES LIKE '%M%' AND MISC_ATTRIBUTES NOT
LIKE '%V%'))
define(is_migrated,(MISC_ATTRIBUTES LIKE '%V%'))
define(is_resident,(NOT MISC_ATTRIBUTES LIKE '%M%'))
There are good, valid
Hi Achim
Set "gpfs:sharemodes=no" did the trick and I will upgrade to 5.0.0.2
next week. Thank you very much.
Regards,
Michal
Dne 4.5.2018 v 10:17 Achim Rehor napsal(a):
Hi Michal,
there was an open defect on this, which had been fixed in level
4.2.3.7 (APAR _IJ03182 _
Hi Michal,there was an open defect on this, which
had been fixed in level 4.2.3.7 (APAR IJ03182
) gpfs.smb
4.5.15_gpfs_31-1 should be in gpfs.smb
4.6.11_gpfs_31-1 package for
the 5.0.0 PTF1 level.Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regardsAchim Rehor Software
Technical Support Specialist AIX/ Emea HPC
Hi Michal,
We occasionally get a request to close a lock file for an Office document but I
wouldn't necessarily say we could easily reproduce it. We're still running
4.2.3.7 though so YMMV.
I'm building out my test cluster at the moment to do some experiments and as
soon as 5.0.1 is released
Hello,
I have problem with "~$somename.xlsx" files in Samba shares at GPFS
Samba cluster. These lock files are supposed to be removed by Samba with
"delete on close" function. This function is working at standard Samba
server in Centos but not with Samba cluster at GPFS. Is this function
13 matches
Mail list logo
