[lustre-discuss] lctl ping node28 at o2ib report Input/output error
Patrick Farrell
paf at cray.com
Wed Jun 27 06:28:55 PDT 2018
I’m a little puzzled - it can switch, but isn’t the data on the failed disk lost...? That’s why Andreas is suggesting RAID. Or is drbd doing syncing of the disk? That seems like a really expensive way to get redundancy, since it would have to be full online mirroring with all the costs in hardware and resource usage that implies...?
ZFS is not a requirement, it generally performs a bit worse than ldiskfs but makes it up with impressive features to improve data integrity and related things. Since it sounds like that’s not a huge concern for you, I would stick with ldiskfs. It will likely be a little faster and is easier to set up.
________________________________
From: lustre-discuss <lustre-discuss-bounces at lists.lustre.org> on behalf of yu sun <sunyu1949 at gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 8:21:43 AM
To: adilger at whamcloud.com
Cc: lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] lctl ping node28 at o2ib report Input/output error
yes， you are right, thanks for your great suggestions.
now we are using glusterfs to store training data for ML, and we begin to investigate lustre to instead glusterfs for performance.
Firstly, yes we do want to get maximum perforance, you means we should use zfs , for example , not each ost/mdt on a separate partitions, for better perforance?
Secondly, we dont use any underlying RAID devices, and we do configure each ost on a separate disk, considering that lustre does not provide disk data redundancy, we are use drbd + pacemarker + corosync for data redundancy and HA, you can see we have configured --servicenode when mkfs.lustre. I dont know how reliable is this solution? it seems ok for our current test, when one disk faild, pacemarker can switch to other ost on the other machine automaticly.
we also want to use zfs and I have test zfs by mirror, However, if the physical machine down，data on the machine will lost. so we decice use the solution listed above.
Now we are testing, and any suggesting is appreciated 😆.
thanks Andreas.
Your
Yu
Andreas Dilger <adilger at whamcloud.com<mailto:adilger at whamcloud.com>> 于2018年6月27日周三 下午7:07写道：
On Jun 27, 2018, at 09:12, yu sun <sunyu1949 at gmail.com<mailto:sunyu1949 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> client:
> root at ml-gpu-ser200.nmg01:~$ mount -t lustre node28 at o2ib1:node29 at o2ib1:/project /mnt/lustre_data
> mount.lustre: mount node28 at o2ib1:node29 at o2ib1:/project at /mnt/lustre_data failed: Input/output error
> Is the MGS running?
> root at ml-gpu-ser200.nmg01:~$ lctl ping node28 at o2ib1
> failed to ping 10.82.143.202 at o2ib1: Input/output error
> root at ml-gpu-ser200.nmg01:~$
>
>
> mgs and mds:
> mkfs.lustre --mgs --reformat --servicenode=node28 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node29 at o2ib1 /dev/sdb1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --mdt --index=0 --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode node28 at o2ib1 --servicenode node29 at o2ib1 --reformat --backfstype=ldiskfs /dev/sdc1
Separate from the LNet issues, it is probably worthwhile to point out some issues
with your configuration. You shouldn't use partitions on the OST and MDT devices
if you want to get maximum performance. That can offset all of the filesystem IO
from the RAID/sector alignment and hurt performance.
Secondly, it isn't clear if you are using underlying RAID devices, or if you are
configuring each OST on a separate disk? It looks like the latter - that you are
making each disk a separate OST. That isn't a good idea for Lustre, since it does
not (yet) have any redundancy at higher layers, and any disk failure would result
in data loss. You currently need to have RAID-5/6 or ZFS for each OST/MDT, unless
this is a really "scratch" filesystem where you don't care if the data is lost and
reformatting the filesystem is OK (i.e. low cost is the primary goal, which is fine
also, but not very common).
We are working at Lustre-level data redundancy, and there is some support for this
in the 2.11 release, but it is not yet in a state where you could reliably use it
to mirror all of the files in the filesystem.
Cheers, Andreas
>
> ost:
> ml-storage-ser22.nmg01:
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node22 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node23 at o2ib1 --ost --index=12 /dev/sdc1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node22 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node23 at o2ib1 --ost --index=13 /dev/sdd1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node22 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node23 at o2ib1 --ost --index=14 /dev/sde1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node22 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node23 at o2ib1 --ost --index=15 /dev/sdf1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node22 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node23 at o2ib1 --ost --index=16 /dev/sdg1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node22 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node23 at o2ib1 --ost --index=17 /dev/sdh1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node22 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node23 at o2ib1 --ost --index=18 /dev/sdi1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node22 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node23 at o2ib1 --ost --index=19 /dev/sdj1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node22 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node23 at o2ib1 --ost --index=20 /dev/sdk1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node22 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node23 at o2ib1 --ost --index=21 /dev/sdl1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node22 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node23 at o2ib1 --ost --index=22 /dev/sdm1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node22 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node23 at o2ib1 --ost --index=23 /dev/sdn1
> ml-storage-ser26.nmg01:
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node26 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node27 at o2ib1 --ost --index=36 /dev/sdc1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node26 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node27 at o2ib1 --ost --index=37 /dev/sdd1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node26 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node27 at o2ib1 --ost --index=38 /dev/sde1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node26 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node27 at o2ib1 --ost --index=39 /dev/sdf1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node26 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node27 at o2ib1 --ost --index=40 /dev/sdg1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node26 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node27 at o2ib1 --ost --index=41 /dev/sdh1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node26 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node27 at o2ib1 --ost --index=42 /dev/sdi1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node26 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node27 at o2ib1 --ost --index=43 /dev/sdj1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node26 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node27 at o2ib1 --ost --index=44 /dev/sdk1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node26 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node27 at o2ib1 --ost --index=45 /dev/sdl1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node26 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node27 at o2ib1 --ost --index=46 /dev/sdm1
> mkfs.lustre --fsname=project --reformat --mgsnode=node28 at o2ib1 --mgsnode=node29 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node26 at o2ib1 --servicenode=node27 at o2ib1 --ost --index=47 /dev/sdn1
>
> Thanks
> Yu
>
> Mohr Jr, Richard Frank (Rick Mohr) <rmohr at utk.edu<mailto:rmohr at utk.edu>> 于2018年6月27日周三 下午1:25写道：
>
> > On Jun 27, 2018, at 12:52 AM, yu sun <sunyu1949 at gmail.com<mailto:sunyu1949 at gmail.com>> wrote:
> >
> > I have create file /etc/modprobe.d/lustre.conf with content on all mdt ost and client:
> > root at ml-gpu-ser200.nmg01:~$ cat /etc/modprobe.d/lustre.conf
> > options lnet networks="o2ib1(eth3.2)"
> > and I exec command line : lnetctl lnet configure --all to make my static lnet configuration take effect. but i still can't ping node28 from my client ml-gpu-ser200.nmg01. I can mount as well as access lustre on client ml-gpu-ser200.nmg01.
>
> What options did you use when mounting the file system?
>
> --
> Rick Mohr
> Senior HPC System Administrator
> National Institute for Computational Sciences
> http://www.nics.tennessee.edu
>
> _______________________________________________
> lustre-discuss mailing list
> lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org<mailto:lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org>
> http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
Cheers, Andreas
---
Andreas Dilger
Principal Lustre Architect
Whamcloud
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss-lustre.org/attachments/20180627/678492b4/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the lustre-discuss
mailing list