On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 12:31:42AM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote:
> Huh?
See bug 13359.
> The manual doesn't say anything about mkfs.lustre or tunefs.lustre, but
> all is to be done using lfs
> (http://manual.lustre.org/manual/LustreManual16_HTML/ConfiguringQuotas.html)
It is a lack in the docum
On May 23, 2008 08:11 +0800, Stuart Midgley wrote:
> Right. So I am still not clear whether 64GB oss's will be of any benefit.
> My understanding at the moment is that oss's don't benefit from larger
> memory, hence we run with 2GB.
Sorry to not be clear - the DMU ARC will allow caching on th
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 10:59:00AM +0100, Guy Coates wrote:
> on the MDS and OSTs, but still I still have the same problem.
You ran the tunefs.lustre command, stopped/started the MDT/OSTs and quotas
were not automatically turned on, right?
Did you run quotacheck on the filesystem at least once?
Pl
Johann Lombardi wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 10:59:00AM +0100, Guy Coates wrote:
>> on the MDS and OSTs, but still I still have the same problem.
>
> You ran the tunefs.lustre command, stopped/started the MDT/OSTs and quotas
> were not automatically turned on, right?
> Did you run quotacheck o
On Friday 23 May 2008 10:09:52 Johann Lombardi wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 12:31:42AM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote:
> > Huh?
>
> See bug 13359.
>
> > The manual doesn't say anything about mkfs.lustre or tunefs.lustre, but
> > all is to be done using lfs
> > (http://manual.lustre.org/manual/Lust
Bernd Schubert wrote:
> On Friday 23 May 2008 10:09:52 Johann Lombardi wrote:
>> On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 12:31:42AM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote:
>>> Huh?
>> See bug 13359.
Humm,
The quotaing is still not persistent.
I've created a new filesystem and ran:
tunefs.lustre--param="xxt.quota_t
On Friday 23 May 2008 13:00:02 Guy Coates wrote:
> Bernd Schubert wrote:
> > On Friday 23 May 2008 10:09:52 Johann Lombardi wrote:
> >> On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 12:31:42AM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote:
> >>> Huh?
> >>
> >> See bug 13359.
>
> Humm,
>
> The quotaing is still not persistent.
>
>
>
> I'v
Bernd Schubert wrote:
> On Friday 23 May 2008 13:00:02 Guy Coates wrote:
>> Bernd Schubert wrote:
>>> On Friday 23 May 2008 10:09:52 Johann Lombardi wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 12:31:42AM +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote:
> Huh?
See bug 13359.
>> Humm,
>>
>> The quotaing is still not pe
On Thu, 2008-05-22 at 10:18 -0400, Kossey, Robert wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Yesterday Red Hat released RHEL5U2 with OFED 1.3 support built in.
Neat.
> Is
> there a plan to provide a Lustre patched kernel release of this, in
> coordination with Lustre 1.6.5, so that there is a prebuilt version of
>
On Fri, 2008-05-23 at 11:30 -0400, Brian J. Murrell wrote:
>
> We don't list the RHEL5 kernel at all. I believe that is an omission.
> I will look into it.
Must have been a mistake. The ChangeLog in 1.6.5rc4 is listing:
* Support for kernels:
2.6.5-7.311 (SLES 9),
2.6.9-
>
> This is not quite a HOWTO but has some interesting suggestions
> for HA and backup (even if I think that the only sensible way to
> backup a large Lustre storage pool is another Lustre storage
> pool):
>
> http://indico.cern.ch/contributionDisplay.py?
> contribId=24&sessionId=12&confId=2739
In the fall we plan to roll out our 1.6.5 release in production and if
all goes well in testing, enable quotas with no limits for block/inode
usage reporting.
I'm adding the tunefs commands to our rollout notes.
Will we need to re-run quotacheck in our startup scripts when the MDS
restarts uncle
Hi,
I am running Centos5 with 2.6.18-8.1.14.el5_lustre.1.6.4.1 as the OS.
I built the custom kernel against the patched source and built
lustre-1.6.1 (and 1.6.3) against the source tree as:
./configure --with-linux=/usr/src/linux-2.6.18-8.1.14.el5_lustre.1.6.4.1
--with-o2ib=/public/ofed/SRC_1.3/of
Incidentally I put the latest release of the Livermore quota clients
up on sourceforge here:
http://rquota.sourceforge.net/
Basically it's quota and repquota for NFS and Lustre only. There is
no "local" file system support.
A tip of the hat to Nicholas Cardo of LBNL who described LBNL's quot
Hi Brock,
I'm experimenting with a Dell iSCSI array in one of our labs here ... so
far, it behaves pretty typically for a Lustre, although the performance
isn't blazing -- but that's due to limitations of the network
infrastructure.
I didn't notice anything in the iSCSI gear that would indicate
On May 23, 2008 12:48 -0700, Jim Garlick wrote:
> Incidentally I put the latest release of the Livermore quota clients
> up on sourceforge here:
>
> http://rquota.sourceforge.net/
>
> Basically it's quota and repquota for NFS and Lustre only. There is
> no "local" file system support.
>
> A
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 03:21:32PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On May 23, 2008 12:48 -0700, Jim Garlick wrote:
> > Incidentally I put the latest release of the Livermore quota clients
> > up on sourceforge here:
> >
> > http://rquota.sourceforge.net/
> >
> > Basically it's quota and repquo
On May 23, 2008 15:06 -0700, Jim Garlick wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 03:21:32PM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > On May 23, 2008 12:48 -0700, Jim Garlick wrote:
> > > Incidentally I put the latest release of the Livermore quota clients
> > > up on sourceforge here:
> > >
> > > http://rqu
On May 23, 2008, at 5:08 PM, Klaus Steden wrote:
>
> Hi Brock,
>
> I'm experimenting with a Dell iSCSI array in one of our labs
> here ... so
> far, it behaves pretty typically for a Lustre, although the
> performance
> isn't blazing -- but that's due to limitations of the network
> infrastruct
19 matches
Mail list logo
