On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 13:43 +0300, Stas Oskin wrote:
What I'm actually look for, is a solution that can take plain Linux
boxes, and unify their space into a single volume, with optional
replication of every file.
You will need to look elsewhere then.
So my question is, whether Lustre able
Hi.
Are you aware of any other solutions that might achieve this?
Regards,
2009/3/30 Brian J. Murrell brian.murr...@sun.com
On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 13:43 +0300, Stas Oskin wrote:
What I'm actually look for, is a solution that can take plain Linux
boxes, and unify their space into a single
Simon Latapie wrote:
Greetings,
I currently have a lustre system with 1 MDS, 2 OSS with 2 OSTs each, and
37 lustre clients (1 login and 36 compute nodes), all using infiniband
as lustre network (o2ib). All nodes are on 1.6.5.1 patched kernel.
There is network error (no packet loss
Hello!
On Mar 30, 2009, at 7:06 AM, Simon Latapie wrote:
I currently have a lustre system with 1 MDS, 2 OSS with 2 OSTs each,
and
37 lustre clients (1 login and 36 compute nodes), all using infiniband
as lustre network (o2ib). All nodes are on 1.6.5.1 patched kernel.
For the past two
Hi. It was pointed out that perhaps I was misunderstanding your
question/situation.
On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 09:16 -0400, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 13:43 +0300, Stas Oskin wrote:
What I'm actually look for, is a solution that can take plain Linux
boxes, and unify their
Hi.
So these Linux boxes you have, do they have a task already or are you
going to dedicate them to the job of serving their disk space out in a
uniform volume?
Actually I'd prefer an approach where these boxes do other tasks, but
depends on the solution.
Do you have any expectations that these
On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 19:15 +0300, Stas Oskin wrote:
Hi.
Hello,
Actually I'd prefer an approach where these boxes do other tasks, but
depends on the solution.
For a Lustre solution, you should dedicate the Linux boxes to sharing
their storage out. For stability and performance, these
Jeremy,
is the running kernel built from the source (and with the
configuration) you specified with --kernel configure option when
building lustre?
I built 1.6.7 from source against a 2.6.22.14 kernel from kernel.org. The
build finished and I installed them, however when I try to make the
Andrew Perepechko wrote:
Jeremy,
is the running kernel built from the source (and with the
configuration) you specified with --kernel configure option when
building lustre?
I found out my mistake, I never patched the kernel. Its working perfectly
now.
--
Jeremy Mann
On Mar 23, 2009 13:19 -0500, Hendelman, Rob wrote:
We recently had an OST become badly corrupted (850G or so in
lost+found). I deactivated this OST on the MDT server the clients.
The OST is not mounted on the OSS (not possible).
You can likely recover many of these files by running the
Sparing myself from doing any diff's can someone tell me if Andreas'
raid5 patches are integrated with the lustre kernels? I'm interested
2.6.16-27 and up.
thanks,
paul
___
Lustre-discuss mailing list
Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
Hi, I am not familiar with using heartbeat with the OSS, I have only used it on
the MDS for failover, since you can't have an active/active configuration on
the MDS. However, you can have active/active on the OSS, I can't understand why
would you want to use heartbeat to unmount the OSTs on one
You can NOT have an OST mounted on both. You can use heartbeat to
mount different OSTs on each, and to mount them all on one node when
the other node goes down.
Kevin
On Mar 30, 2009, at 6:16 PM, Jeffrey Bennett j...@sdsc.edu wrote:
Hi, I am not familiar with using heartbeat with the OSS,
Jab-
Hi, I am not familiar with using heartbeat with the OSS, I have only used it
on the MDS for failover, since you can't have an active/active configuration
on the MDS. However, you can have active/active on the OSS, I can't
understand why would you want to use heartbeat to unmount the
On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 17:52 -0700, Jeffrey Bennett wrote:
Thanks Kevin for clearing this up.
So when the manual mentions Load-balanced Active/Active configuration, what
does that mean?
It simply means out of all of the OSTs that both machines can see/use,
you mount 50% of them on one
Hi all,
Are there any additional repositories that provide RPMs for older kernels?
In particular I am looking of lustre client modules for 1.6.7 for a
2.6.9-55.0.2 (centos/rhel 4.5) kernel.
If not, is there a way to build RPMs for just the kernel modules? It is my
impression that 'make RPMs'
Does anyone know if the KB is still being maintained? if so, where is
the URL for it?
TIA
___
Lustre-discuss mailing list
Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
The KB has been migrated to the Lustre manual:
http://manual.lustre.org/manual/LustreManual16_HTML/KnowledgeBase.html#50548891_pgfId-1288153
The KB is not actively maintained.
Sheila
Mag Gam wrote:
Does anyone know if the KB is still being maintained? if so, where is
the URL for it?
TIA
Dear all,
There are more than 100 files demaged recently without any error logs on
OSS. The demaged files has same size with their original copys in our backup
system. However, the chksum changed. For example,
#ll run_0008126_All_file015_SFO-1.raw.353645
-rw-r--r-- 1 chyd u07 2108082156
19 matches
Mail list logo
