Re: [lustre-discuss] upgrade process from zfs pool based lustre-2.12 (RH7) to lustre-2.15 (RH8)

Hi Bernd I will defer to others on some of your points, but just to note that a 2.15.5 release is expected out shortly with support for Alma 8.10 and ZFS 2.1.15 so, if your timing permits, perhaps you should defer until that release is available Peter On 5/17/24, 6:25 AM, "lustre-discuss on

Re: [lustre-discuss] Dropped support for Ubuntu?

Ubuntu 22.04 client packages are now on the download site From: Ramiro Alba Queipo Date: Wednesday, January 10, 2024 at 6:27 AM To: Peter Jones Cc: "lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org" Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] Dropped support for Ubuntu? Peter, That's great. Thank you very much Best

Re: [lustre-discuss] Dropped support for Ubuntu?

Sorry about that. It’s just an oversight due to us trying to wrap up the release ahead of the holidays. I’ve corrected the changelog and I’ll get the packages corrected shortly (it looks like ubuntu 2004 was accidentally copied across instead of 2204). If you need the packages urgently then

Re: [lustre-discuss] Install instructions for Rocky 8.8

Your memory serves you well Thomas - 2.15.58 is a development tag of what will eventually become 2.16. While I would expect it still to be possible to build/install Rocky 8.8 for this tag, it would definitely be better to focus on the b2_15 branch for something to use ATM. On 9/26/23, 4:03

Re: [lustre-discuss] EL9

Lana The good news is that RHEL 9.2 server support is in place on master and all changes are built and tested with RHEL 9.2 servers and so it is possible to use this for non-production use today. Less good news is that Lustre 2.16 is still not GA - it's been delayed while the final remaining

Re: [lustre-discuss] Lustre 2.15.1 server with ZFS nothing provides ksym

Jon Have you tried building 2.15.3 against Rocky 8.6 locally? While it is true that Whamcloud focuses testing on the last RHEL/Rocky minor release, many sites still use the same Lustre software with down-rev OS versions…. Peter From: lustre-discuss on behalf of Jon Marshall via

Re: [lustre-discuss] EL9

Yes. We will officially support RHEL9.x servers in Lustre 2.16. On 2023-05-03, 8:52 AM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Lana Deere via lustre-discuss" mailto:lustre-discuss-boun...@lists.lustre.org> on behalf of lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org > wrote: Is

Re: [lustre-discuss] EL9

Lana Work is happening - see https://review.whamcloud.com/c/fs/lustre-release/+/48938 - so it is possible that this will all be in place ahead of next year's 2.16 release. Peter On 2022-11-18, 11:31 AM, "Lana Deere" wrote: On Wed, Sep 28, 2022 at 12:29 PM Peter Jones wrote: >

Re: [lustre-discuss] Lustre 2.15.1 change log

There is a general problem with the Lustre.org wiki ATM. Hopefully service will be restored shortly. In the meantime is there a specific piece of information that you wanted to know? The list of fixed issues is also available in JIRA for example -

Re: [lustre-discuss] EL9

Official support will come first in 2.15.2 but builds are already happening for b2_15 if you want to test it out - https://build.whamcloud.com/job/lustre-b2_15/ On 2022-09-28, 8:23 AM, "Lana Deere" wrote: I see that LU-15874 was resolved Aug. 19th but I don't see EL9 versions yet in

Re: [lustre-discuss] network error on bulk WRITE/bad log

Stepan 2.14.56 is not a version of Lustre – it is an interim dev build. Even if it does not resolve this specific issue, I would strongly recommend switching to the recently released Lustre 2.15.1 release Peter From: lustre-discuss on behalf of Stepan Nassyr via lustre-discuss Reply-To:

Re: [lustre-discuss] 2.12.9-ib release?

Should be sorted out now On 2022-06-24, 12:50 AM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Andrew Elwell via lustre-discuss" wrote: Hi folks, I see the 2.12.9/ release tree on https://downloads.whamcloud.com/public/lustre/, but I don't see the accompanying 2.12.9-ib/ one. ISTR

Re: [lustre-discuss] EL9

You can follow the progress on this under LU-15874. We’ll likely add support for RHEL9 clients in an upcoming 2.15.x maintenance release. From: lustre-discuss on behalf of Lana Deere via lustre-discuss Reply-To: Lana Deere Date: Friday, June 10,

Re: [lustre-discuss] Lustre support version to RHEL 8 or RHEL8.5

The upcoming Lustre 2.15 release should work. RC5 is very close to the finished article. We would not recommend using this for production until it is confirmed as GA but if you are able to test that it will meet your needs then this will liklely be the most convenient/expedient way for you to

Re: [lustre-discuss] Small bug in 2.14 debian/rules

Ake Have you opened a JIRA ticket about this? Peter On 2022-06-02, 2:01 AM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Åke Sandgren" wrote: Sorry, meant master not 2.14, and it's commit a5084c2f2ec On 6/2/22 10:33, Åke Sandgren wrote: > Hi! > > In 2.14.0 debian/rules there is a

Re: [lustre-discuss] RoCEv2

Hi David There are definitely sites using RoCE in production. Hopefully some of them notice this and share their experiences. Peter On 2022-05-11, 5:22 AM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of David Neujahr via lustre-discuss" wrote: Hey Lustre-discuss, does anybody know if RDMA over

Re: [lustre-discuss] How popular is Lustre with ZFS

Anna It is not limited to top500 systems, but there have been some questions about usage of zfs/ldiskfs over the years in the OpenSFS community surveys - https://wiki.opensfs.org/Lustre_Community_Survey Peter From: lustre-discuss on behalf of Anna Fuchs Date: Sunday, February 6, 2022 at

Re: [lustre-discuss] [EXTERNAL] Re: Lustre Client Lockup Under Buffered I/O (2.14/2.15)

Ellis JIRA accounts can be requested from i...@whamcloud.com Peter From: lustre-discuss on behalf of Ellis Wilson via lustre-discuss Reply-To: Ellis Wilson Date: Thursday, January 20, 2022 at 6:20 AM To: Raj , Patrick Farrell Cc:

Re: [lustre-discuss] project quota problem on existing directories from filesystem created on zfs 0.7 pool

What distro are you running on your servers? On 2022-01-17, 8:13 AM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Chen, Wei via lustre-discuss" wrote: On Mon, Jan 17, 2022 at 10:17:45AM +, Degremont, Aurelien wrote: > I'm not specialist of project quota, but I have a more generic comment. > I

Re: [lustre-discuss] (no subject)

Hi Koos Thanks for bringing this up. This was just due to the person who usually copies the files across being on vacation at the time of the release. It’s there now. Peter From: lustre-discuss on behalf of "Meijering, Koos via lustre-discuss" Reply-To: "Meijering, Koos" Date: Wednesday,

Re: [lustre-discuss] lustre lts roadmap

m via lustre-discuss" wrote: Hi, are there plans to enable use of zfs-2.0+ with Lustre 2.12.x ? Saw this commit in b2_12: 317beee6a5 LU-15026 zfs: Fix ZFS(2.0.0-1) build error on CentOS (3.10) Best Regards Fredrik On 2021-11-22 14:37, Peter

Re: [lustre-discuss] lustre lts roadmap

Hi Einar Based on the results we see in the OpenSFS community survey, the data clearly shows that the majority of sites stick to the LTS releases. Lustre 2.12.8 LTS is in release testing ATM. From survey results again, most current Centos users intend to use either Rocky or Alma when they

Re: [lustre-discuss] kernel 5.10 on RHEL8 and lustre-client kind of working

Furthermore, I notice that you mention that you are running “DDN Lustre servers 2.12.6”. so you should also check with DDN support before making any changes to the code that you are running in production. From: lustre-discuss on behalf of Andreas Dilger via lustre-discuss Reply-To: Andreas

Re: [lustre-discuss] Lustre version 2.14 support for CentOS 7

Hugo 2.14 will likely build/work against centos 7.9 even though that was not the primary kernel it was tested against Peter From: lustre-discuss on behalf of Hugo R Hernandez via lustre-discuss Reply-To: Hugo R Hernandez Date: Thursday, April 15, 2021 at 8:50 AM To:

Re: [lustre-discuss] OSS crashes - could be LU-14341

Yes 2.12.6 supports CentOS 7.9 - https://wiki.whamcloud.com/display/PUB/Lustre+Support+Matrix From: lustre-discuss on behalf of Sid Young via lustre-discuss Reply-To: Sid Young Date: Tuesday, March 2, 2021 at 6:48 PM To: lustre-discuss Subject: [lustre-discuss] OSS crashes - could be