options can be used to
specify special default striping for files created with O_APPEND.
On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 11:21 AM Vicker, Darby J. (JSC-EG111)[Jacobs
Technology, Inc.] via lustre-discuss
mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>> wrote:
Wow, I would say that is definitely not
Wow, I would say that is definitely not expected. I can recreate this on both
of our LFS’s. One is community lustre 2.14, the other is a DDN Exascalar.
Shown below is our community lustre but we also have a 3-segment PFL on our
Exascalar and the behavor is the same there.
$ echo > aaa
$
u have Hardware RAID running on the JBOD
and SAS HBA on the servers, but for a total software solution I’m unaware how
that will work effectively.
Thank you.
On 5 Jan 2024, at 14:07, Vicker, Darby J. (JSC-EG111)[Jacobs Technology, Inc.]
via lustre-discuss wrote:
We are in the process
We are in the process of retiring two long standing LFS's (about 8 years old),
which we built and managed ourselves. Both use ZFS and have the MDT'S on ssd's
in a JBOD that require the kind of software-based management you describe, in
our case ZFS pools built on multipath devices. The MDT in
> I don’t have a .lustre directory at the filesystem root.
It's there, but doesn't show up even with 'ls -a'. If you cd into it or ls it,
it's there. Lustre magic. :)
-Original Message-
From: lustre-discuss mailto:lustre-discuss-boun...@lists.lustre.org>> on behalf of Daniel Szkola
n perl and I think the output is buffered so I’m waiting to the
the first output.)
Other suggestions welcome if you have ideas how to move these files into
subdirectories more efficiently.
From: lustre-discuss
mailto:lustre-discuss-boun...@lists.lustre.org>>
on behalf of "Vicke
the first output.)
Other suggestions welcome if you have ideas how to move these files into
subdirectories more efficiently.
From: lustre-discuss on behalf of
"Vicker, Darby J. (JSC-EG111)[Jacobs Technology, Inc.] via lustre-discuss"
Reply-To: "Vicker, Darby J. (JSC-EG111)[Ja
gestions welcome if you have ideas how to move these files into
subdirectories more efficiently.
From: lustre-discuss on behalf of
"Vicker, Darby J. (JSC-EG111)[Jacobs Technology, Inc.] via lustre-discuss"
Reply-To: "Vicker, Darby J. (JSC-EG111)[Jacobs Technology
-discuss on behalf of
"Vicker, Darby J. (JSC-EG111)[Jacobs Technology, Inc.] via lustre-discuss"
Reply-To: "Vicker, Darby J. (JSC-EG111)[Jacobs Technology, Inc.]"
Date: Friday, September 22, 2023 at 2:49 PM
To: Andreas Dilger
Cc: "lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org"
Sorry to hear this. We are dealing with MDT data loss right now as well and
its no fun. Please look at my posts to the list from last week for some more
information about what we are doing to recover. Our situation is not as bad as
yours, we only lost part of our MDT data (the last 3 months
"user.job"
xattr on every object, exactly to help identify the provenance of files after
the fact (regardless of whether there is corruption), but it only just landed
to master and will be in 2.16. That is cold comfort, but would help in the
future.
Cheers, Andreas
On Sep 20, 2023
nd will be in 2.16. That is cold comfort, but would help in the
future.
Cheers, Andreas
On Sep 20, 2023, at 15:34, Vicker, Darby J. (JSC-EG111)[Jacobs Technology,
Inc.] via lustre-discuss wrote:
Hello,
We have recently accidentally deleted some of our MDT data. I think its gone
for good but looki
Hello,
We have recently accidentally deleted some of our MDT data. I think its gone
for good but looking for advice to see if there is any way to recover.
Thoughts appreciated.
We run two LFS’s on the same set of hardware. We didn’t set out to do this,
but it kind of evolved. The original
We have been using ZFS on our LFS for about the last 7 years. Back then, we
were using ZFS 0.7 and lustre 2.10 and there was a significant decrease in
metadata performance compared to ldiskfs. Most of our workflows at the time
didn’t need a lot of metadata performance and so we were OK with
> Instead, my recommendation would be to use an ext4 filesystem image to hold
> the many small files (during create, if from a single client, or aggregated
> after they are created). Later, this filesystem image could be mounted
> read-only on multiple clients for access. Also, the whole image
An update. We were able to recover our filesystem (minus the two days between
when the ZFS swap occurred and when we detected it and shut down the
filesystem). Simply promoting the cloned ZFS volume (which was really our
primary volume) and cleaning up the snapshot and clone got us back to
Thanks Andreas – I appreciate the info.
I am dd’ing the MDT block device (both of them – more details below) to
separate storage now.
I’ve written this up on the ZFS mailing list.
https://zfsonlinux.topicbox.com/groups/zfs-discuss/Tcb8a3ef663db0031/need-help-with-data-recovery-if-possible
A quick follow up. I thought an lfsck would only clean up (i.e. remove
orphaned MDT and OST objects) but it appears this might have a good shot at
repairing the file system – specifically, recreating the MDT objects with the
--create-mdtobj option. We have started this command:
Hi everyone,
We ran into a problem with our lustre filesystem this weekend and could use a
sanity check and/or advice on recovery.
We are running on CentOS 7.9, ZFS 2.1.4 and Lustre 2.14. We are using ZFS
OST’s but and an ldiskfs MDT (for better MDT performance). For various
reasons, the
e best way to reverse any ill effects the "lfs setquota -p
1" command may have caused?
* Should there be some protection in the lustre source for this?
-Original Message-
From: lustre-discuss on behalf of
"Vicker, Darby J. (JSC-EG111)[Jacobs Technology, Inc.] vi
Hello everyone,
We've run into a pretty nasty LBUG that took our LFS down. We're not exactly
sure the cause and could use some help. Its pretty much identical to this:
https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-13189
One of our OSS's started crashing repeated last night. We are configured with
like this:
options ko2iblnd peer_credits=128 peer_credits_hiw=64 credits=1024 ntx=2048
map_on_demand=256 fmr_pool_size=2048 fmr_flush_trigger=512 fmr_cache=1
conns_per_peer=4
Hope it helps.
Rick
On 9/13/21 1:53 PM, Vicker, Darby J. (JSC-EG111)[Jacobs Technology, Inc.] via
lustre-discuss wrot
mand=256 fmr_pool_size=2048 fmr_flush_trigger=512 fmr_cache=1
conns_per_peer=4
Hope it helps.
Rick
On 9/13/21 1:53 PM, Vicker, Darby J. (JSC-EG111)[Jacobs Technology, Inc.] via
lustre-discuss wrote:
Hello,
I would like to know how to turn off auto discovery of peers on a client. This
seems
ize=2048 fmr_flush_trigger=512 fmr_cache=1
conns_per_peer=4
Hope it helps.
Rick
On 9/13/21 1:53 PM, Vicker, Darby J. (JSC-EG111)[Jacobs Technology, Inc.] via
lustre-discuss wrote:
Hello,
I would like to know how to turn off auto discovery of peers on a client. This
seems like it should be str
Hello,
I would like to know how to turn off auto discovery of peers on a client. This
seems like it should be straight forward but we can't get it to work. Please
fill me in on what I'm missing.
We recently upgraded our servers to 2.14. Our servers are multi-homed (1 tcp
network and 2
I'd recommend using the io500 benchmark. This runs both bandwidth and metadata
tests and has checks to run prevent caching from tainting the results (like
forcing it to run for a specified amount of time). I've found it useful for
benchmarking all of our file systems (lustre, NFS, local,
FWIW, I've had the same need and I do exactly the brute force iteration you
speak of for our LFS's to log user usage vs time. For our NFS server, we use
ZFS and there is a nice one-liner to give that info in ZFS. I agree, it would
be nice if there was a similar one-liner for lustre.
27 matches
Mail list logo
