[Lustre-discuss] Question on setting up fail-over

[Wojciech Turek]

Hi David,

You need to umount your OSTs and MDTs and run tunefs.lustre  --writeconf
/dev/<lustre device> on all Lustre OSTs and MDTs This will force the lustre
targets to fetch new configuration next time they are mounted. The order of
mounting is: MGT -> MDT -> OSTs

Best regards,

Wojciech



On 17 August 2010 18:19, David Noriega <tsk133 at my.utsa.edu> wrote:

> Oppps some how I changed the target name of all OSTs to lustre-OST0000
> and trying to mount any other ost fails. I've gone and found the 'More
> Complicated Configuration' section which details the usage of
> --mgsnode=nid1,nid2 and so using this I think I'll just reformat.
>
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 11:26 AM, David Noriega <tsk133 at my.utsa.edu>
> wrote:
> > Some info:
> > MDS/MGS 192.168.5.104
> > Passive failover MDS/MGS 192.168.5.105
> > OSS1 192.168.5.100
> > OSS2 192.168.5.101
> >
> > I've got some more questions about setting up failover. Besides having
> > heartbeat setup, what about using tunefs.lustre to set options?
> >
> > On the MDS/MGS I set the following options
> > tunefs.lustre --failnode=192.168.5.105 /dev/lustre-mdt-dg/lv1
> > Heartbeat works just fine, can mount on the primary node and then
> > failover to the other and back.
> >
> > Now on the OSSs things get a bit more confusing. Reading these two blog
> posts:
> >
> http://mergingbusinessandit.blogspot.com/2008/12/implementing-lustre-failover.html
> > http://jermen.posterous.com/lustre-mds-failover
> >
> > From these I tried these options:
> > tunefs.lustre --erase-params --mgsnode=192.168.5.104 at tcp0
> > --mgsnode=192.168.5.105 at tcp0 --failover=192.168.5.101 at tcp0
> > -write-params /dev/lustre-ost1-dg1/lv1
> >
> > I ran that for all for OSTs, changing the failover option on the last
> > two OSTs to point OSS1 while the first two point to OST2.
> >
> > My understanding is that you mount the OSTs first, then the MDS, but
> > the OSTs are failing to mount. Are all these options needed? Or is
> > simply specifying the primary MDS is enough for it to find out about
> > the second MDS?
> >
> > David
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 2:14 PM, Kevin Van Maren
> > <kevin.van.maren at oracle.com> wrote:
> >> David Noriega wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Ok I've gotten heartbeat setup with the two OSSs, but I do have a
> >>> question that isn't stated in the documentation. Shouldn't the lustre
> >>> mounts be removed from fstab once they are given to heartbeat since
> >>> when it comes online, it will mount the resources, correct?
> >>>
> >>> David
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes: on the servers, they must be not there or "noauto".  Once you start
> >> running heartbeat,
> >> you have given control of the resource away, and must not mount/umount
> it
> >> yourself
> >> (unless you stop heartbeat on both nodes in the HA pair to get control
> >> back).
> >>
> >> Kevin
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Personally, I liked the university. They gave us money and facilities,
> > we didn't have to produce anything! You've never been out of college!
> > You don't know what it's like out there! I've worked in the private
> > sector. They expect results. -Ray Ghostbusters
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Personally, I liked the university. They gave us money and facilities,
> we didn't have to produce anything! You've never been out of college!
> You don't know what it's like out there! I've worked in the private
> sector. They expect results. -Ray Ghostbusters
> _______________________________________________
> Lustre-discuss mailing list
> Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
>



-- 
Wojciech Turek

Senior System Architect

High Performance Computing Service
University of Cambridge
Email: wjt27 at cam.ac.uk
Tel: (+)44 1223 763517
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss-lustre.org/attachments/20100817/689fcae6/attachment.htm>