[Lustre-discuss] Lustre-2.1, CentOS-6.2: unknown param quota_type=ug

Michael Sternberg sternberg at anl.gov
Thu Jan 5 01:46:27 PST 2012


Phew!  OK, I found a manual-bug on this already open –– http://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LUDOC-26


Thank you very much!
Michael


On Jan 5, 2012, at 3:10 , Johann Lombardi wrote:

> In lustre 2.x, this must be mdd.quota_type (instead of mdt.quota_type). A patch was landed to master some time ago (will be available in 2.2) to interpret mdt.quota_type as mdd.quota_type transparently, see http://review.whamcloud.com/#change,354.
> 
> Cheers,
> Johann
> 
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 01:35:14AM -0600, Michael Sternberg wrote:
>> I cannot get quota to work on a clean new file system with Lustre-2.1 on CentOS-6.2.
>> 
>> 	# tunefs.lustre --param mdt.quota_type=ug /dev/mapper/mdt1
>> 	# mount /mnt/mdt1
>> 	mount.lustre: mount /dev/mapper/mdt1 at /mnt/mdt1 failed: Function not implemented
>> 
>> This logs:
>> 
>> 	LustreError: 3957:0:(obd_config.c:1140:class_process_proc_param()) carbonfs-MDT0000: unknown param quota_type=ug
>> 
>> Am I missing some component or parameter syntax? I went by http://build.whamcloud.com/job/lustre-manual/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/lustre_manual.html#dbdoclet.50438217_31982 .
>> 
>> 
>> I actually got "Function not implemented" already with mkfs.lustre --param mdt.quota_type=ug2 ...  I decided to defer quota setup until later because I had a note to this effect from a much earlier install. So, I got everything up and running without quota, MGS MDS on same node but different LUNs, 4 OSS with external journals, client.
>> 
>> The system for all nodes (servers and client) is:
>> 
>> 	- CentOS-6.2, but with the wc1 kernel for CentOS-6.1 = 2.6.32-131.6.1.el6_lustre.g65156ed.x86_64
>> 
>> 		(Is this asking for trouble?  Things worked under 1.8.x with sticking to a previous minor-version OS kernel.)
>> 	
>> 	- Failover for the MGS/MDS pair and 2 OSS pairs.
>> 
>> I had been using quota with 1.8.6 on CentOS-5.6 without problems. The 2.1 fs is on new hardware to migrate to.
>> 
>> 	
>> Best, Michael




More information about the lustre-discuss mailing list