Re: [gpfsug-discuss] cpu shielding

2016-03-04 Thread Matt Weil
ug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org] on behalf of Bryan Banister > [bbanis...@jumptrading.com] > Sent: 02 March 2016 20:17 > To: gpfsug main discussion list > Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] cpu shielding > > I would agree with Vic that in most cases the issues are with the underlyi

Re: [gpfsug-discuss] cpu shielding

2016-03-02 Thread Simon Thompson (Research Computing - IT Services)
...@jumptrading.com] Sent: 02 March 2016 20:17 To: gpfsug main discussion list Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] cpu shielding I would agree with Vic that in most cases the issues are with the underlying network communication. We are using the cgroups to mainly protect against runaway processes that attempt

Re: [gpfsug-discuss] cpu shielding

2016-03-02 Thread Bryan Banister
...@spectrumscale.org [mailto:gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org] On Behalf Of Matt Weil Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2016 1:47 PM To: gpfsug main discussion list Subject: [gpfsug-discuss] cpu shielding All, We are seeing issues on our GPFS clients where mmfsd is not able to respond in time to renew its lease