Unfortunately, I did not create this FS so not sure what command params were
used.
Output of df -T :
$ df -T /gfs
FilesystemType 1K-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on
/dev/mapper/vggfs01-lvol00
gfs 104551424 8120236 96431188 8% /gfs
Output of mount:
$ mount
/
Tajdar Siddiqui wrote:
Thanx for your help so far. A lame question probably: How do i figure
out the gfs version:
$ rpm -qa | grep gfs
gfs2-utils-0.1.38-1.el5
kmod-gfs-0.1.19-7.el5_1.1
kmod-gfs-0.1.16-5.2.6.18_8.el5
gfs-utils-0.1.12-1.el5
Not sure how to figure it out.
Did you make the FS wi
On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 16:38 -0400, John Ruemker wrote:
> James Chamberlain wrote:
> >
> > On Mar 25, 2008, at 5:54 PM, Bob Peterson wrote:
> >
> >> If it were my file system, and I didn't have a backup, and I had
> >> data on it that I absolutely needed to get back, I personally would
> >> use the
We had a similar issue and we just removed sg3utils (orsomething like
that), if your not going to use it.
Gary Romo
IBM Global Technology Services
303.458.4415
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pager:1.877.552.9264
Text message: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Ryan O'Hara" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTE
Hi Gordan (apologize i misspelled your name last time),
Thanx for your help so far. A lame question probably: How do i figure out
the gfs version:
$ rpm -qa | grep GFS
--returns nothing
$ rpm -qa | grep gfs
gfs2-utils-0.1.38-1.el5
kmod-gfs-0.1.19-7.el5_1.1
kmod-gfs-0.1.16-5.2.6.18_8.el5
gfs-uti
James Chamberlain wrote:
On Mar 25, 2008, at 5:54 PM, Bob Peterson wrote:
If it were my file system, and I didn't have a backup, and I had
data on it that I absolutely needed to get back, I personally would
use the gfs2_edit tool (assuming RHEL5, Centos5 or similar) which can
mostly operate on
Tajdar Siddiqui wrote:
Yes, this test works fine on an ext3 filesystem.
The JVM's are on different nodes.
The files being written/read on the 2 JVM's are different (file-names).
Where does locking come into play here ?
> A JVM is only reading the files it creates, so there is no cross.
Wr
Paolo Marini wrote:
I have implemented a cluster of a few xen guest with a shared GFS
filesystem residing on a SAN build with openfiler to support iSCSI
storage.
Physical servers are 3 machines implementing a physical cluster, each
one equipped with quad xeon and 4 G RAM. The network interfac
Hi Gordon,
Thanx for your reply.
Yes, this test works fine on an ext3 filesystem.
The JVM's are on different nodes.
The files being written/read on the 2 JVM's are different (file-names).
Where does locking come into play here ?
A JVM is only reading the files it creates, so there is no cross.
On Mar 25, 2008, at 5:54 PM, Bob Peterson wrote:
If it were my file system, and I didn't have a backup, and I had
data on it that I absolutely needed to get back, I personally would
use the gfs2_edit tool (assuming RHEL5, Centos5 or similar) which can
mostly operate on gfs1 file systems. The "
I have implemented a cluster of a few xen guest with a shared GFS
filesystem residing on a SAN build with openfiler to support iSCSI storage.
Physical servers are 3 machines implementing a physical cluster, each
one equipped with quad xeon and 4 G RAM. The network interface is based
on channel
Speaking of...
If I already have a cluster set up that split brained itself (but the services
are still running on one, and it wont un-split brain with the other box up...)
how hard would it be to add a quorum disk?
I guess I could post my whole problem and let smarter people figure out what I
Ryan and all else that have answered,
Thank you for the info on scsi_reserve. I have disabled the
script and all seems okay. What is a little confusing is that the
script/service was enabled before the upgrade, but did not cause any
scsi reservation conflicts.
-Sajesh-
Ryan O'Hara wro
I went back and investigated why this might happen. Seems that I had
seen it before but could not recall how this sort of thing happens.
For 4.6, the scsi_reserve script should only be run if you intend to use
SCSI reservations as a fence mechanism, as you correctly pointed out at
the end of
Nice Gordan!!!
It works now!! :-p
You're welcome. :)
"Quorum" its the number minimum of nodes on the cluster?
Yes, it's the minimum number of nodes required for the cluster to start.
This is (n+1)/2, round up number of nodes defined in cluster.conf. This
ensures that the cluster can't
Nice Gordan!!!
It works now!! :-p
"Quorum" its the number minimum of nodes on the cluster?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# cman_tool status
Version: 6.0.1
Config Version: 3
Cluster Name: mycluster
Cluster Id: 56756
Cluster Member: Yes
Cluster Generation: 140
Membership state: Cluster-Member
Nodes: 2
Exp
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 11:17 AM, Steven Whitehouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> Now I agree that it would be nice to support barriers in GFS2, but it
> won't solve any problems relating to ordering of I/O unless all of the
> underlying device supports them too. See also Alasdair's response to th
On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 15:43 +0100, Christine Caulfield wrote:
> > Has anyone else seen anything like this?
> Yes, we seem to have collected quite a few bugzillas on the subject! The
> fix is in CVS for LVM2. Packages are on their way I believe.
Ah yes. I searched BZ for dlm bugs but forgot to
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Tajdar Siddiqui wrote:
When 2 JVM's (multiple Threads per Java Virtual Machine) are writing to the
same directory
on GFS, on of the JVM doesn't see the files it writes on the GFS.
The Writer Threads on JVM think they're done, but the files don't show up on
"ls" etc.
The ot
Hi,
We are evaluating GFS for use as a highly concurrent distributed file
system.
What I have observed:
When 2 JVM's (multiple Threads per Java Virtual Machine) are writing to the
same directory on GFS, on of the JVM doesn't see the files it writes on the
GFS.
The Writer Threads on JVM think th
Hi,
On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 10:26 -0400, Wendy Cheng wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 5:53 AM, Steven Whitehouse
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 15:16 +0200, Mathieu Avila wrote:
> > Le Mon, 31 Mar 2008 11:54:20 +0100,
> > St
Replace:
with
in cluster.conf.
Gordan
On Wed, 2 Apr 2008, Tiago Cruz wrote:
Hello guys,
I have one cluster with two machines, running RHEL 5.1 x86_64.
The Storage device has imported using GNDB and formated using GFS, to
mount on both nodes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# gnbd_import -v -l
Dev
Hello guys,
I have one cluster with two machines, running RHEL 5.1 x86_64.
The Storage device has imported using GNDB and formated using GFS, to
mount on both nodes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ~]# gnbd_import -v -l
Device name : cluster
--
Minor # : 0
sysfs name : /block/gnbd0
Robert Clark wrote:
> I'm having some problems with clvmd hanging on our 8-node cluster.
> Once hung, any lvm commands wait indefinitely. This normally happens
> when starting up the cluster or if multiple nodes reboot. After some
> experimentation I've managed to reproduce it consistently on a s
I'm having some problems with clvmd hanging on our 8-node cluster.
Once hung, any lvm commands wait indefinitely. This normally happens
when starting up the cluster or if multiple nodes reboot. After some
experimentation I've managed to reproduce it consistently on a smaller
3-node test cluster b
On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 5:53 AM, Steven Whitehouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 15:16 +0200, Mathieu Avila wrote:
> > Le Mon, 31 Mar 2008 11:54:20 +0100,
> > Steven Whitehouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > > Both GFS1 and GFS2 ar
I guess ignore my last reply; I just read the title in it's entirety. He
does not want to use shared storage.
Sorry !!!
Bennie Thomas wrote:
You can attach a network disk device and have it fail over with the
active system and make
tomcat and mysql dependant of the disk resource. This is the
You can attach a network disk device and have it fail over with the
active system and make
tomcat and mysql dependant of the disk resource. This is the simple
route. when dealing with
clusters you should keep the "KISS" approach in-mind.
Regards,
Bennie
Any views or opinions presented are sol
Hi,
On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 15:16 +0200, Mathieu Avila wrote:
> Le Mon, 31 Mar 2008 11:54:20 +0100,
> Steven Whitehouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
>
> > Hi,
> >
>
> Hi,
>
> > Both GFS1 and GFS2 are safe from this problem since neither of them
> > use barriers. Instead we do a flush at the cri
sajith napisał(a):
> Hai all,
>
> I am new to linux cluster. I want to set up a two node cluster using
> rhcs. In my application I am using tomcat and mysql as database. My aim is
> to configure both servers in active-passive configuration. I have tested the
> failover of ip and process usin
30 matches
Mail list logo
