On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 11:33:08PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 07:25:29PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 02:27:14PM +0100, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > > a packet thats supposedly from .129 except that its mac address is now
> > > 0:ff:1d:e9:b9:a3. So it looks
On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 07:25:29PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 02:27:14PM +0100, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > a packet thats supposedly from .129 except that its mac address is now
> > 0:ff:1d:e9:b9:a3. So it looks like the .129 address might be configured
> > on two different n
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 02:27:14PM +0100, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 12:32 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 04:50:14PM +0100, Christine Caulfield wrote:
> > > J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > >> On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 09:51:02AM +0100, Christine Ca
On Thu, Jul 10, 2008 at 10:26:54AM +0100, Christine Caulfield wrote:
> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 04:50:14PM +0100, Christine Caulfield wrote:
>>> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 09:51:02AM +0100, Christine Caulfield wrote:
> Steven Whitehouse wrote:
>
Hi,
On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 12:32 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 04:50:14PM +0100, Christine Caulfield wrote:
> > J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 09:51:02AM +0100, Christine Caulfield wrote:
> >>> Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue,
J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 04:50:14PM +0100, Christine Caulfield wrote:
J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 09:51:02AM +0100, Christine Caulfield wrote:
Steven Whitehouse wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 18:15 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 04:50:14PM +0100, Christine Caulfield wrote:
> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 09:51:02AM +0100, Christine Caulfield wrote:
>>> Steven Whitehouse wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 18:15 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2008
J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 09:51:02AM +0100, Christine Caulfield wrote:
Steven Whitehouse wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 18:15 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 02:49:28PM -0400, bfields wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:48:28AM -0500, David Teigland
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 09:44:24AM +0100, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 18:15 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 02:49:28PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:48:28AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 09:51:02AM +0100, Christine Caulfield wrote:
> Steven Whitehouse wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 18:15 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 02:49:28PM -0400, bfields wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:48:28AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
>>
Steven Whitehouse wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 18:15 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 02:49:28PM -0400, bfields wrote:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:48:28AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 05:51:05PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
- write(contr
Hi,
On Tue, 2008-07-08 at 18:15 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 02:49:28PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:48:28AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 05:51:05PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > > - write(control_fd, in,
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 02:49:28PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:48:28AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 05:51:05PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > - write(control_fd, in, sizeof(struct gdlm_plock_info));
> > > + write(control_fd, in, sizeof(struct
On Mon, Jul 07, 2008 at 10:48:28AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 05:51:05PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > - write(control_fd, in, sizeof(struct gdlm_plock_info));
> > + write(control_fd, in, sizeof(struct dlm_plock_info));
>
> Gah, sorry, I keep fixing that and it
On Sun, Jul 06, 2008 at 05:51:05PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> - write(control_fd, in, sizeof(struct gdlm_plock_info));
> + write(control_fd, in, sizeof(struct dlm_plock_info));
Gah, sorry, I keep fixing that and it keeps reappearing.
> Jul 1 14:06:42 piglet2 kernel: dlm: connect fr
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 01:41:17PM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 01:28:56PM -0400, david m. richter wrote:
> > i also have another setup in vmware; while i doubt it's
> > substantively different than bruce's, i'm a ready and willing tester. is
> > there a different b
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 12:18:45PM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 05:10:52PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > > So, the first mount (on "piglet1") succeeds. The second (on "piglet2")
> > > > returns immediately without mounting, and leaves this in the logs:
> > > >
> >
On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 01:28:56PM -0400, david m. richter wrote:
> i also have another setup in vmware; while i doubt it's
> substantively different than bruce's, i'm a ready and willing tester. is
> there a different branch (or repo, or just a stack of patches somewhere)
> that i should
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 05:10:52PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > > So, the first mount (on "piglet1") succeeds. The second (on "piglet2")
> > > returns immediately without mounting, and leaves this in the logs:
> > >
> > > gfs_controld[3035]: segfault at 0 ip 08051361 sp bfd88ae0 error 4 in
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 03:11:06PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> So, the first mount (on "piglet1") succeeds. The second (on "piglet2")
> returns immediately without mounting, and leaves this in the logs:
>
> gfs_controld[3035]: segfault at 0 ip 08051361 sp bfd88ae0 error 4 in
> gfs_cont
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 04:33:15PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 03:11:06PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 02:35:29PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 10:27:33AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> > > > This mount appears to have been successful.
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 03:11:06PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 02:35:29PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 10:27:33AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> > > This mount appears to have been successful. Usual things to collect for
> > > debugging the other problems:
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 02:35:29PM -0400, bfields wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 10:27:33AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> > This mount appears to have been successful. Usual things to collect for
> > debugging the other problems:
> > - any errors in /var/log/messages from all nodes
> > - cman_t
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 10:27:33AM -0500, David Teigland wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 06:45:44PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > I'm trying to get a gfs2 file system running on some kvm hosts, using an
> > ordinary qemu disk for the shared storage (is there any reason this
> > can't work?).
>
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 02:56:10PM +0100, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 18:45 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > I'm trying to get a gfs2 file system running on some kvm hosts, using an
> > ordinary qemu disk for the shared storage (is there any reason this
> > can't work
On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 06:45:44PM -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> I'm trying to get a gfs2 file system running on some kvm hosts, using an
> ordinary qemu disk for the shared storage (is there any reason this
> can't work?).
>
> I installed openais80.3 from source (after modifying Makefile so "ma
Hi,
On Wed, 2008-06-25 at 18:45 -0400, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> I'm trying to get a gfs2 file system running on some kvm hosts, using an
> ordinary qemu disk for the shared storage (is there any reason this
> can't work?).
>
> I installed openais80.3 from source (after modifying Makefile so "make
I'm trying to get a gfs2 file system running on some kvm hosts, using an
ordinary qemu disk for the shared storage (is there any reason this
can't work?).
I installed openais80.3 from source (after modifying Makefile so "make
install" would install to /), and installed gfs2 from the STABLE2 branch
28 matches
Mail list logo
