[lustre-discuss] max_frags 257 too large

[Einar Næss Jensen]

Thanks for the clarification, Diego

We are in for an  upgrade next month so we might just wait and see :)


Best Regards
EInar Næss Jensen

________________________________________
From: Moreno Lazaro  Diego (ID) <diego.moreno at id.ethz.ch>
Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2022 13:07
To: Einar Næss Jensen; lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] max_frags 257 too large

Hi Einar,

I've seen this in older versions of Lustre-2.12 where map_on_demand=1 on the ko2iblnd module is needed in order to keep compatibility with newer versions. There are a couple of patches where this requirement for map_on_demand was removed though it's now set by default:

https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-15094 (don't require map_on_demand to negotiate max_frags)
https://jira.whamcloud.com/browse/LU-15186 (set by default map_on_demand)

I know at least DDN includes these patches on their 2.12.6-ddn8 version. I don't see the patches on the latest 2.12.9 on the community version. Maybe you just need to enable map_on_demand and that could solve it.

Regards,

Diego

On 08.09.22, 11:22, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Einar Næss Jensen" <lustre-discuss-bounces at lists.lustre.org on behalf of einar.nass.jensen at ntnu.no> wrote:

    We have a case of one of our MDS servers stopped working correctly (we have failed over the mdt to other mds server), and while we wait for vendor response, I see something in our logs which I'm curious about:

    LNet: 117894:0:(o2iblnd_cb.c:2631:kiblnd_passive_connect()) Can't accept conn from 10.145.30.168 at o2ib (version 12): max_frags 257 too large (256 wanted)

    What does it mean? is it somethinbg to be concerned over?



    Best Regards
    Einar Næss Jensen
    _______________________________________________
    lustre-discuss mailing list
    lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
    http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org