Sure enough, we updated enough clients with the 1.6.4.2 bits to accommodate our 512-way job and it now fires right up. That sure read like a server side fix to us but thanks for setting us straight. Thanks for clarifying the upgrade questions as well.
Regards, Charlie Taylor UF HPC Center On Feb 20, 2008, at 9:27 AM, Brian J. Murrell wrote: > On Sun, 2008-02-17 at 08:04 -0500, Charles Taylor wrote: >> We are running lustre 1.6.3 with some patches we applied by hand with >> a patched 2.6.18-8.1.14 kernel on both the clients and servers. >> We think we are now hitting lustre bug 13197 > > Do you mean 13917? > >> and can no longer >> operate without a fix. We could apply the 13197 patch to 1.6.3 and >> keep going as we are but we would like to start moving to 1.6.4.2. > > Good idea. > >> Would it be insane to update to 1.6.4.2 on the MDS and OSSs while >> continuing to run 1.6.3 on the clients > > If you want to fix 13917, yes. 13917 is a client-side fix. > >> or is 1.6.4.2 similar enough >> to interoperate with 1.6.3 clients? > > Our interoperability commitment provides that 1.6.3 and 1.6.4.2 will > inter-operate, however upgrading the OSS and MDS only will not fix > 13917. > > b. > > _______________________________________________ > Lustre-discuss mailing list > Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org > http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss