[Lustre-discuss] Inode errors at time of job failure

[Thomas Roth]

Hi,
these ll_inode_revalidate_fini errors are unfortunately quite known to us.
So what would you guess if that happens again and again, on a number of
clients - MDT softly dying away?
Because we haven't seen any mass evictions (and no reasons for that) in
connection with these errors.
Or could the problem with the cached open files also be present if the
communication interruption does not show up as an eviction in the logs?

Regards,
Thomas

Oleg Drokin wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> On Aug 5, 2009, at 3:12 PM, Daniel Kulinski wrote:
> 
>> What would cause the following error to appear?
> 
> Typically this is some sort of a race where you presume an inode exist  
> (because you have some traces of it in memory),
> but it is not anymore (on mds, anyway). So when client comes to fetch  
> inode attributes, there is nothing anymore.
> Normally this should not happen because lustre uses locking to ensure  
> caching consistency, but in some cases
> this is not true (e.g. open returns dentry without lock oftentimes).  
> Also if a client was evicted,
> cached opened files could not be revoked right away until they are  
> closed.
> 
>> LustreError: 10991:0:(file.c:2930:ll_inode_revalidate_fini())  
>> failure -2 inode 14520180
>> This happened at the same time a job failed.  Error number 2 is  
>> ENOENT which means that this inode does not exist?
> 
> Right.
> 
>> Is there a way to query the MDS to find out which file this inode  
>> should have belonged to?
> 
> Well, there is lfs find that can search by inode number, but since  
> there is no such inode anymore, there is no way
> to find out to what name it was attached (and the name likely does not  
> exist either).
> 
> Did you have client eviction before this message by any chance?
> What was the job doing at the time?
> 
> Bye,
>      Oleg
> _______________________________________________
> Lustre-discuss mailing list
> Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss