No, we will only have a single samba server sharing out lustre-backed
files. What do you mean in a way similar to samba? What does samba do
that is different? We are using lustre to replace our old nfs server
for serving up home directories in our cluster and the rest of our
systems.
On Fri, Aug
Well the samba server will be just for that, but we only have the
single filesystem '/lustre' So because of that I'm going to have to
put the flock option on all of the clients? this was my original
question.
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:52 AM, Mark Hahn h...@mcmaster.ca wrote:
No, we will only
Hello!
Similar as in some app whose locking would conflict with samba locks in a way
to protect
updates by samba from updates from those apps at the same time should they
happen
in the same moment of time.
Now that I think about it, I remember that samba does not really use flock, but
rather
Are their issues with Samba and Lustre working together? I remember
something about turning oplocks off in samba, and while testing samba
I noticed this
[2010/08/27 17:30:59, 3] lib/util.c:fcntl_getlock(2064)
fcntl_getlock: lock request failed at offset 75694080 count 65536
type 1 (Function not
Hello!
On Aug 27, 2010, at 6:41 PM, David Noriega wrote:
But I also found out about the flock option for lustre. Should I set
flock on all clients? or can I just use localflock option on the
fileserver?
It depends.
If you are 100% sure none of your other clients use flocks in a way similar to
