[Lustre-discuss] Can't set quota larger than 4TB

Bernadat, Philippe philippe_bernadat at hp.com
Tue Oct 23 04:43:12 PDT 2007


You can proceed, 15 and 16 are down

Philippe 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: lustre-discuss-bounces at clusterfs.com 
> [mailto:lustre-discuss-bounces at clusterfs.com] On Behalf Of 
> Niklas Edmundsson
> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 1:30 PM
> To: Kalpak Shah
> Cc: lustre-discuss at clusterfs.com
> Subject: Re: [Lustre-discuss] Can't set quota larger than 4TB
> 
> On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Kalpak Shah wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 2007-10-23 at 12:50 +0200, Niklas Edmundsson wrote:
> >> Hi again :)
> >>
> >> Lustre 1.6.2 on amd64, 2.6.18 kernel.
> >>
> >> We seem to be unable to set lustre quotas larger than 4TB. 
> Somewhere
> >> along the way the value seems to be truncated to 32bits. A 
> quick gdb
> >> session of an lfs binary with debug info shows the quota 
> struct being
> >> filled in correctly, so it seems to be something in the bowels of
> >> lustre somewhere...
> >
> > This is being worked upon in bug 13904.
> 
> "You are not authorized to access bug #13904."
> 
> Would it be too much to ask that issues are filed in public bugs once 
> identified in private bugs?
> 
> As I've said before on the mailing list: The bugs themselves should 
> never need to be private, however some customer test cases might need 
> to be.
> 
> In any case, I'm assuming this isn't fixed in 1.6.3 then. Any ETA? 
> Lustre 1.6.3.1? :)
> 
> /Nikke
> -- 
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-
>   Niklas Edmundsson, Admin @ {acc,hpc2n}.umu.se     |    
> nikke at hpc2n.umu.se
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------
>   I am not a dictator.  It's just I have a grumpy face.
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lustre-discuss mailing list
> Lustre-discuss at clusterfs.com
> https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
> 




More information about the lustre-discuss mailing list