Daniel,
In the future you might want to consider posting some entries or pieces of a
log rather than the entire log file. =)
Was this from the OSS that you say was rebooting or from your MDS node? I would
look at the log file of the OSS node(s) that contain OST0006 and OST0007 and
see if
On Tue, 2010-12-21 at 11:13 +0530, Daniel Raj wrote:
I am Daniel. My OSS getting automatically rebooted again and again
If you mean a full reboot and not a panic, this is very likely not a
Lustre problem.
*kernel: LustreError: 23351:0:(ldlm_lib.c:1892:target_send_reply_msg()) @@@
On 2010-12-21, at 8:58, Charles Taylor tay...@hpc.ufl.edu wrote:
So we are evacuating all the OSTs, replacing
the Areca 1680ix cards with Adaptec 51645s, re-initializing the LUNs,
reformatting the LUNs as OSTs (using the same OST index as before) and
remounting them.That is the plan
On Dec 21, 2010, at 12:39 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote:
It's unfortunate that you didn't see the thread from a few weeks ago
that discussed this exact topic of OST replacement.
Agreed. :(
It should get a section in the manual I think.
Agreed.
This file is at /O/0/LAST_ID (capital 'o' then
Hello!
I guess I am a little bit late to the party, but I was just reading comments in
bug 16900 and have this question I really need to ask.
On Aug 23, 2010, at 10:58 PM, Jeremy Filizetti wrote:
The larger RPCs from bug 16900 offered some significant performance when
working over the WAN.
In the attachment I created that Andreas posted at
https://bugzilla.lustre.org/attachment.cgi?id=31423 if you look at graph 1
and 2 they are both using larger than default max_rpcs_in_flight. I believe
the data without the patch from bug 16900 had max_rpcs_in_flight=42. For
the data with the
Hello!
On Dec 22, 2010, at 12:43 AM, Jeremy Filizetti wrote:
In the attachment I created that Andreas posted at
https://bugzilla.lustre.org/attachment.cgi?id=31423 if you look at graph 1
and 2 they are both using larger than default max_rpcs_in_flight. I believe
the data without the
