Howdy,
Lustre 1.8.5 using the EL5 provided RPMs on both clients and servers
lustre-client-modules-1.8.5-2.6.18_194.17.1.el5_lustre.1.8.5
lustre-client-1.8.5-2.6.18_194.17.1.el5_lustre.1.8.5
The servers and clients are all running CentOS 5.5 x86_64 with kernel
2.6.18-194.17.1.el5 (servers running
If you are using DDR and QDR or any 2 different cards cards in the same machine
there is no guarantee that the same IB cards get assigned to ib0 and ib.
To fix that problem you need to comment out the following 3 lines
/etc/init.d/openibd:
#for i in `grep "^driver: " /etc/sysconfig/hwconf
Thanks, I forgot to include the card info:
The servers each have a single IB card: dual port MT26528 QDR
o2ib0(ib0) on each server is attached to the QLogic switch (with three attached
M3601Q switches 48 attached blades)
o2ib1(ib1) on each server is attached to a stack of two M3601Q switches with
On 2011-03-16, at 3:04 PM, Mike Hanby wrote:
> Thanks, I forgot to include the card info:
>
> The servers each have a single IB card: dual port MT26528 QDR
> o2ib0(ib0) on each server is attached to the QLogic switch (with three
> attached M3601Q switches 48 attached blades)
> o2ib1(ib1) on each
My seach-fu is failing me.
I seem to recall a discussion about OST mounts being sequentialized,
even if the mount commands are issued in parallel. Perhaps something
about a superblock lock being to blame.
Does any one recall that discussion? Is there a bug open on this? Was
there any resolu
On Mar 16, 2011, at 2:18 PM, Christopher J. Morrone wrote:
> My seach-fu is failing me.
>
> I seem to recall a discussion about OST mounts being sequentialized,
> even if the mount commands are issued in parallel. Perhaps something
> about a superblock lock being to blame.
>
> Does any one r
Thats the one. Thanks, Jason!
On 03/16/2011 02:25 PM, Jason Rappleye wrote:
>
> On Mar 16, 2011, at 2:18 PM, Christopher J. Morrone wrote:
>
>> My seach-fu is failing me.
>>
>> I seem to recall a discussion about OST mounts being sequentialized,
>> even if the mount commands are issued in paralle
>
> Does any one recall that discussion? Is there a bug open on this? Was
> there any resolution?
>
> There is a bug open in the Whamcloud JIRA that a patch.
http://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-26
I have not had the time to setup our test environment to test the patch,
although I have included
