[Lustre-discuss] lustre interoperability
Nathan Rutman
Nathan.Rutman at Sun.COM
Tue Oct 30 16:15:03 PDT 2007
Yes, that will work fine.
Well, let me rephrase: there is no reason I can think of why it wouldn't
work. But we don't generally test interoperability -- the only regular
testing we do is with 1.4.x to the latest release. Let me also say that
we almost never change on-disk formats, so if you're upgrading your
entire cluster from 1.6.0.1 to 1.6.3 then there is in fact no
"interoperability" issue at all; it's all 1.6.3. Indeed, it is just
updating the RPMs. You don't have to --writeconf or anything like that.
Jerome, Ron wrote:
> Could somebody (Andreas maybe :) give a definitive answer on this...
>
>
>>> Having said that, I believe 1.6.0 and 1.6.3 is actually something
>>>
> that
>
>>> will work, but I'm not 100% certain of this, so I'll allow others to
>>> correct me.
>>>
>
> ... as I would like to do just this, go from 1.6.0.1 to 1.6.3 and would
> rather not have to go through the intermediate versions if I don't have
> to.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Ron Jerome
> National Research Council Canada
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: lustre-discuss-bounces at clusterfs.com [mailto:lustre-discuss-
>> bounces at clusterfs.com] On Behalf Of Jody McIntyre
>> Sent: October 15, 2007 11:58 PM
>> To: Jeff Blasius
>> Cc: lustre-discuss at clusterfs.com
>> Subject: Re: [Lustre-discuss] lustre interoperability
>>
>> Hi Jeff,
>>
>> On Sun, Oct 14, 2007 at 11:31:45PM -0400, Jeff Blasius wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Thank you for this information. Can or someone else comment on what
>>>
>> it
>>
>>> means to upgrade? I assume it's not enough to simply build the
>>> software or update via rpm. After updating, you should go through
>>>
> the
>
>>> process of having all of the OSS's join the MGS/MDS and verify a
>>> successful client connection?
>>>
>> This part is in the manual :) See:
>> http://manual.lustre.org/manual/LustreManual16_HTML/DynamicHTML-13-
>> 1.html
>>
>>
>>> Just for my curiosity, is there a standard process the server
>>> components undergo during the upgrade?
>>>
>> I don't understand what you mean here. Can you explain your question?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jody
>>
>>
>>> Thank You,
>>> jeff
>>>
>>> On 10/12/07, Jody McIntyre <scjody at clusterfs.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Jeff,
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Oct 12, 2007 at 12:01:04PM -0400, Jeff Blasius wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I've seriously trekked through the lustre documentation and
>>>>>
>> haven't
>>
>>>>> found an answer regarding this. Is there an official policy
>>>>>
>> regarding
>>
>>>>> interoperability among different versions of various lustre
>>>>> components?
>>>>>
>>>> By coincidence, I just sent information about this to our
>>>>
>> documentation
>>
>>>> team. It should eventually reach the manual. Here it is:
>>>>
>>>> ---
>>>> Our supported upgrades are from one minor version to another, for
>>>> example 1.4.10 to 1.4.11 or 1.6.2 to 1.6.3, and also from the
>>>>
>> latest
>>
>>>> 1.4.x version to the latest 1.6.x version, so 1.4.11 to 1.6.3 is
>>>> supported.
>>>>
>>>> We also support downgrades within the same ranges. For example,
>>>>
> if
>
>> you
>>
>>>> upgrade from 1.6.2 to 1.6.3, you can also downgrade to 1.6.2 (but
>>>>
> a
>
>>>> fresh install of 1.6.3 is _not_ guaranteed to be downgradeable.)
>>>>
>>>> Note that other combinations will work and we support them in
>>>>
>> specific
>>
>>>> cases when requested by customers, but the ranges above will
>>>>
> always
>
>>>> work.
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> For example (and I'm sure other groups are in the same boat
>>>>>
>> here),
>>
>>>>> it's relatively painless to perform a rolling upgrade to the
>>>>>
>> lustre
>>
>>>>> clients, but upgrading the OSS or MDS takes more convincing. Is
>>>>>
>> it OK
>>
>>>>> for me to run a patched but 1.6.0 based OSS with a 1.6.3 client?
>>>>>
>> In
>>
>>>>> this case all of the lustre components (kernel, lustre, ldiskfs)
>>>>>
>> are
>>
>>>>> the same version for each host. Similarly, is it OK to run a
>>>>>
>> lustre
>>
>>>>> kernel version out of sync with the userland tools? For example
>>>>>
> a
>
>>>>> 1.6.0 kernel with a 1.6.3 lustre build on the same host?
>>>>>
>>>> Not necessarily. You should do a rolling upgrade to 1.6.1, then
>>>>
>> 1.6.2,
>>
>>>> then 1.6.3. Upgrading will be easier if you stay more current -
>>>>
>> 1.6.0
>>
>>>> is fairly old at this point.
>>>>
>>>> Having said that, I believe 1.6.0 and 1.6.3 is actually something
>>>>
>> that
>>
>>>> will work, but I'm not 100% certain of this, so I'll allow others
>>>>
>> to
>>
>>>> correct me.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Jody
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I understand that many of these combinations do in fact work,
>>>>>
> I'm
>
>> more
>>
>>>>> interested if they're likely to lead to data corruption or
>>>>>
> client
>
>>>>> evictions. I'm not sure how often incompatibilities arise, but
>>>>>
> if
>
>> it's
>>
>>>>> relatively rare, it would be useful if that was announced on the
>>>>> change log. Of course if there's a serious "Do at your own risk"
>>>>> policy that would also be useful to know.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thank You,
>>>>> jeff
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Jeff Blasius / jeff.blasius at yale.edu
>>>>> Phone: (203)432-9940 51 Prospect Rm. 011
>>>>> High Performance Computing (HPC)
>>>>> Linux Systems Design & Support (LSDS)
>>>>> Yale University Information Technology Services (ITS)
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Lustre-discuss mailing list
>>>>> Lustre-discuss at clusterfs.com
>>>>> https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Jeff Blasius / jeff.blasius at yale.edu
>>> Phone: (203)432-9940 51 Prospect Rm. 011
>>> High Performance Computing (HPC)
>>> UNIX Systems Administrator, Linux Systems Design & Support (LSDS)
>>> Yale University Information Technology Services (ITS)
>>>
>>>
>> --
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lustre-discuss mailing list
>> Lustre-discuss at clusterfs.com
>> https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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