On Jul 1, 2009, at 10:03 , Josephine Palencia wrote:
>
> OS: Centos 5.3, x86_64
> Kernel: 2.6.18-128.1.6
>
> [r...@attractor ~]# cat /proc/fs/lustre/version
> lustre: 1.9.210
> ..
>
> Looking for mkfs.ldiskfs during mkfs.lustre?
> Did a find on previous working lustre-1.9 working and didn't f
On Jul 01, 2009 13:03 -0400, Josephine Palencia wrote:
> [r...@attractor ~]# cat /proc/fs/lustre/version
> lustre: 1.9.210
>
> Looking for mkfs.ldiskfs during mkfs.lustre?
> Did a find on previous working lustre-1.9 working and didn't find one.
> Ps advice.
Well, mkfs.ldiskfs doesn't exist, it s
Basically, when a new OSS server was added, I followed this procedure
(I'm not sure that all the steps are needed but this works with our
installation):
quotainv
quotacheck
lfs setquota -u donvito --block-softlimit 0 --block-hardlimit 0 /lustre
lfs setquota -u donvito --block-softlimit 20
OS: Centos 5.3, x86_64
Kernel: 2.6.18-128.1.6
[r...@attractor ~]# cat /proc/fs/lustre/version
lustre: 1.9.210
..
Looking for mkfs.ldiskfs during mkfs.lustre?
Did a find on previous working lustre-1.9 working and didn't find one.
Ps advice.
[r...@attractor ~]# mkfs.lustre --fsname=jwan0 --md
How did you solve this, we will be implementing quotas on our system soon
and don't want to fall into the same trap.
Thanks,
Robert LeBlanc
Life Sciences & Undergraduate Education Computer Support
Brigham Young University
On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 5:53 AM, Giacinto Donvito <
giacinto.donv...@ba.in
On Jun 25, 2009, at 12:48 AM, Kevin Van Maren wrote:
> When ext4 (or ZFS) is used instead of ext3 as the basis for ldiskfs.
> ext4 will increase it to 16TB. Search bugzilla for more info.
For now, we limit the OST size to 8TB (can be forced with a mount
option)
even on ext4-based ldiskfs, since
Thank you Zhiyong,
with this hint I was able to find a way to solve the problem.
Cheers,
Giacinto
--
--
~~
Giacinto DonvitoLIBI -- EGEE3 SA1 INFN - Bari ITALY
---
On Jul 1, 2009, at 12:37 PM, Ralf Utermann wrote:
> thanks for this info. Our question would be, whether 1.8.1 supports a
> 2.6.27 patched kernel.
There is no patch series (for both kernel & ldiskfs) available for
2.6.27
and we will likely not provide one before we support 2.6.30, since we
need
Johann Lombardi wrote:
> On Jun 30, 2009, at 3:09 PM, Peter Jones wrote:
>> Work to support 2.6.30 is taking place under bug 19808. It does not
>> look
>> like this will be ready in time for 1.8.1 but should make 1.8.2
>
> Actually, 1.8.1 should support 2.6.27 patchless client.
> As for server s
> Hi All,
>
> I'm experiencing some problem in a test installation of lustre 1.8.0.X
>
> The installation is composed by one server hosting the MDS, and two
> servers hosting the OSTs.
> One of the servers has 12x2.7TB devices and the other has 16x2.3TB
> devices.
>
> All the devices were config
On Jun 30, 2009, at 3:09 PM, Peter Jones wrote:
> Work to support 2.6.30 is taking place under bug 19808. It does not
> look
> like this will be ready in time for 1.8.1 but should make 1.8.2
Actually, 1.8.1 should support 2.6.27 patchless client.
As for server support, 2.6.30 won't indeed be av
I tried also using Lustre
1.6.7.2 with the official kernels and it works always in the same way:
the first joined server honours
the quota denying writing when quota is reached while the second server does
allow writing from the same user and from the same client.
I also tried to
use different kern
On Jun 29, 2009, at 7:27 PM, Robert LeBlanc wrote:
> We issued
> ./lustrecvs b1_8_1
The branch name is b_release_1_8_1.
Johann
___
Lustre-discuss mailing list
Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
13 matches
Mail list logo
