guys,
actually, the original cmds i ran did have the = signs for the
--failnode= arguments; i gave the wrong bash history info to
kevin to analyse when he asked for them from the host :)
however, having said that, it's the NIDs that were missing from the
hosts that fixed the issues i was havin
On Wed, 2008-11-26 at 10:22 -0700, Kevin Van Maren wrote:
>
> Brian,
Hi Kevin,
> Here are the original, incorrect, mkfs commands:
>
> mkfs.lustre --reformat --fsname bananafs --failnode lustremds2 --mgs
> /dev/sdb
> mkfs.lustre --reformat --fsname bananafs --failnode lustremds2
> --mgsnode=lu
Kevin Van Maren wrote:
> Brian J. Murrell wrote:
>> On Tue, 2008-11-25 at 23:34 +, neil rutter wrote:
>>
>>> kevin, brian,
>>>
>>> thanks to you both. i had a mkfs.lustre error, which after had been
>>> pointed out fixed the issue.
>>>
>>
>> Can you share the error here so that future s
Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-11-25 at 23:34 +, neil rutter wrote:
>
>> kevin, brian,
>>
>> thanks to you both. i had a mkfs.lustre error, which after had been
>> pointed out fixed the issue.
>>
>
> Can you share the error here so that future searches of this problem are
> com
On Tue, 2008-11-25 at 23:34 +, neil rutter wrote:
> kevin, brian,
>
> thanks to you both. i had a mkfs.lustre error, which after had been
> pointed out fixed the issue.
Can you share the error here so that future searches of this problem are
complete with a solution?
There's nothing more fr
I have seen a few papers around, but does anyone have comments on how
to optimize ether lustre or abaqus to use lustre for scratch?
I see reads coming in at only 20MB/s and IO Wait gets quite high on
the client.
I know this is probably not enough information, but is there any
knobs people ha
Hi all:
I am starting an installation of Lustre with 76 DELL PowerEdge SC1435 (2
Quad-Core processors) and Mellanox DDR 20 Gb/s infiniband Cards and I
wonder if anyone is using or beginning to use a similar installation
(basically Lustre + Ubuntu 8.04 + Infinidad) so as we can comment some
aspects
The %util of memory on OSS was always around 10% ,even when OSS was going to
die.
The OSS kernel is:
2.6.9-67.0.7.EL_lustre.1.6.5smp(32bit)
Lustre version is 1.6.5.1
We have 8GB physical memory and 16GB(never been used) swap total.
Is there a problem with memory management?
Nikita Danilov
Lu Wang writes:
> Dear list,
Hello,
> I found these errors on OSS, is this a dangerours signal ?
your ost runs out of memory, which is not by itself `dangerous' as a
temporary condition (client resends pages in this case). What version of
lustre and kernel are you using?
Nikita.
