On 2010-10-21, at 18:44, Wojciech Turek wrote:
> fsck has finished and does not find any more errors to correct. However when
> I try to mount the device as ldiskfs kernel panics with following message:
>
> Assertion failure in cleanup_journal_tail() at fs/jbd/checkpoint.c:459:
> "blocknr !=
Hi,
fsck has finished and does not find any more errors to correct. However when
I try to mount the device as ldiskfs kernel panics with following message:
Assertion failure in cleanup_journal_tail() at fs/jbd/checkpoint.c:459:
"blocknr != 0"
--- [cut here ] - [please bite here ]
Witam!
W liście datowanym 20 października 2010 (17:57:34) napisano:
> I assume your question is related to the server, since clients
> generally work with vanilla kernels.
> We are working on the RHEL6 2.6.32 for Lustre 2.1 (available in
> bugzilla), and I'd hope that this will also work fairl
Thanks Ken, that worked.
On 21 October 2010 17:39, Ken Hornstein wrote:
> >Now I have another problem. After last segfault I can not restart the fsck
> >due to MMP.
> >[...]
> >Also when I try to access filesystem via debugfs it fails:
> >
> >debugfs -c -R 'ls' /dev/scratch2_ost16vg/ost16lv
> >d
Hi Bernd,
Thanks for the tip.
I don't have high hopes for recovering to much but from where I stand I have
nothing to loose. Failed OST was a part of the scratch filesystem so in
theory the data weren't that sensitive. However some people would be very
happy if they could recover any data.
Best r
Hello Wojciech Turek,
On Thursday, October 21, 2010, Wojciech Turek wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
>
> I have restarted fsck after the segfault and it ran for several hours and
> it segfaulted again.
>
> Pass 3A: Optimizing directories
> Failed to optimize directory ??? (73031): EXT2 directory corrupted
>Now I have another problem. After last segfault I can not restart the fsck
>due to MMP.
>[...]
>Also when I try to access filesystem via debugfs it fails:
>
>debugfs -c -R 'ls' /dev/scratch2_ost16vg/ost16lv
>debugfs 1.41.10.sun2 (24-Feb-2010)
>/dev/scratch2_ost16vg/ost16lv: MMP: fsck being run whi
Charles Taylor wrote:
> On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:51 AM, Brock Palen wrote:
>
>> On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:48 AM, Joe Landman wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/21/2010 09:37 AM, Brock Palen wrote:
We recently added a new oss, it has 1 1Gb interface and 1 10Gb
interface,
The 10Gb interface is eth4 10
Hi Andreas,
I have restarted fsck after the segfault and it ran for several hours and it
segfaulted again.
Pass 3A: Optimizing directories
Failed to optimize directory ??? (73031): EXT2 directory corrupted
Failed to optimize directory ??? (73041): EXT2 directory corrupted
Failed to optimize direc
Having a bit more context would help see where the problem is. It may just be
that with the other filesystems being formatted on top of the original that the
filesystem is unrecoverable.
E2fsck ran out of memory, but there shouldn't be a 2GB directory in the
filesystem either, so it seems thi
Just as a FYI, you can set most of the bonding options in the ifcfg-bond0 file.
IE:
BONDING_OPTS="arp_ip_target=10.248.58.254 arp_interval=500 mode=active-backup
primary=eth0"
Then your modprobe.conf only needs:
alias bond0 bonding
-Original Message-
From: lustre-discuss-boun...@lists
On 10/21/2010 10:29 AM, Brock Palen wrote:
>
>
>> Why do you need both active? If one is a backup to the other, then
>> bond them as a primary/backup pair, meaning only one will be active
>> at at a time, ie, your designated primary (unless it goes down).
>
> We could do this, the 10Gb drivers hav
OK, quick startup on bonding, as we use it for our OSS here.
We have 2 NICs we bond (SL5.5, an RHEL variant), eth1 at 1Gb and eth2 at
10Gb using Myricom hardware. 10.10.1.2 is the network gateway, a
convenient arp target that should always be up.
[r...@umdist04 network-scripts]# cat ifcfg-bond
On Oct 21, 2010, at 10:35 AM, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 10:29 -0400, Brock Palen wrote:
>>
>> We could do this, the 10Gb drivers have been such a pain for us we wanted to
>> have a 'back door' management network to get to the box should we have
>> issues with the 10Gb dri
On Thu, 2010-10-21 at 10:29 -0400, Brock Palen wrote:
>
> We could do this, the 10Gb drivers have been such a pain for us we wanted to
> have a 'back door' management network to get to the box should we have issues
> with the 10Gb driver.
If you really do want two separate networks, one for Lu
Maybe I am missing a point here but can you explain me why would you need to
have two NICs in one host on the same subnet?
If you need additional access route to your host why not to configure eth0
on different subnet?
On 21 October 2010 15:29, Brock Palen wrote:
>
>
> > Why do you need both act
> Why do you need both active? If one is a backup to the other, then bond
> them as a primary/backup pair, meaning only one will be active at at a
> time, ie, your designated primary (unless it goes down).
We could do this, the 10Gb drivers have been such a pain for us we wanted to
have a 'b
On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:51 AM, Brock Palen wrote:
> On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:48 AM, Joe Landman wrote:
>
>> On 10/21/2010 09:37 AM, Brock Palen wrote:
>>> We recently added a new oss, it has 1 1Gb interface and 1 10Gb
>>> interface,
>>>
>>> The 10Gb interface is eth4 10.164.0.166 The 1Gb interface i
Why do you need both active? If one is a backup to the other, then bond
them as a primary/backup pair, meaning only one will be active at at a
time, ie, your designated primary (unless it goes down).
bob
On 10/21/2010 9:51 AM, Brock Palen wrote:
> On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:48 AM, Joe Landman wrote
On Oct 21, 2010, at 9:48 AM, Joe Landman wrote:
> On 10/21/2010 09:37 AM, Brock Palen wrote:
>> We recently added a new oss, it has 1 1Gb interface and 1 10Gb
>> interface,
>>
>> The 10Gb interface is eth4 10.164.0.166 The 1Gb interface is eth0
>> 10.164.0.10
>
> They look like they are on the
On 10/21/2010 09:37 AM, Brock Palen wrote:
> We recently added a new oss, it has 1 1Gb interface and 1 10Gb
> interface,
>
> The 10Gb interface is eth4 10.164.0.166 The 1Gb interface is eth0
> 10.164.0.10
They look like they are on the same subnet if you are using /24 ...
>
> In modprobe.conf I
We recently added a new oss, it has 1 1Gb interface and 1 10Gb interface,
The 10Gb interface is eth4 10.164.0.166
The 1Gb interface is eth0 10.164.0.10
In modprobe.conf I have:
options lnet networks=tcp0(eth4)
lctl list_nids
10.164.0@tcp
>From a host I run:
lctl which_nid oss4
10.164.0
Hi Andreas,
I ran e2fsck -fy on recreated LVM but it segfaulted after running for
sometime:
...
Block #2098188 (938180923) causes directory to be too big. CLEARED.
Error storing directory block information (inode=208387, block=0,
num=261770): Memory allocation failed
Recreate journal? yes
Creat
23 matches
Mail list logo
