[Lustre-discuss] df running slow

[Dilger, Andreas]

This set_param is just the temporary (lost at unmount or reboot) version of the conf_param originally run. If the conf_param is not persistent across a client reboot, then that is a bug.

Presumably "ost_name" in the conf_param invocation was indeed replaced with the actual OST name ("fsname-OSTnnnn")?

Cheers, Andreas

On Nov 26, 2014, at 10:00, Alexander I Kulyavtsev <aik at fnal.gov<mailto:aik at fnal.gov>> wrote:

Try
/usr/sbin/lctl set_param osc.lustre-OST0001-*.active=0

as workarownd on client host, with proper names for filesystem and ost names for all retired OSTs.

We had 'df' hanging on client after we retired some OSTs on 1.8.9 system and now keep this mantra in rc.local .

What client version do you have,  2.5.3  or 1.8.x?

Alex.

On Nov 26, 2014, at 6:59 AM, Jon Tegner <tegner at foi.se<mailto:tegner at foi.se>> wrote:

Hi!

I recently got some help regarding removing an OSS/OST from the file system. Last thing I did was to permanently remove it with (on the MDS):

lctl conf_param ost_name.osc.active=0

This all seems to be working, and on the clients, the command


lctl dl

indicates the OSS/OST is inactive. However, after a reboot of the clients the same command no longer indicates the removed OSS/OST to be inactive. Besides, the command


df


Takes almost 2 minutes to complete.

I'm probably doing something really stupid here, and would be happy if someone could tell me what it is ;-)

Running 2.5.3.

Regards,

/jon
_______________________________________________
Lustre-discuss mailing list
Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org<mailto:Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org>
http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss

_______________________________________________
Lustre-discuss mailing list
Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org<mailto:Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org>
http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss