Uploaded image for project: 'Lustre'
  1. Lustre
  2. LU-13402

sanity test_252: Invalid number of mdtlov clients returned by /usr/sbin/lr_reader

Details

    • Bug
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Critical
    • Lustre 2.14.0
    • Lustre 2.14.0
    • None
    • 3
    • 9223372036854775807

    Description

      This issue was created by maloo for S Buisson <sbuisson@ddn.com>

      This issue relates to the following test suite run: https://testing.whamcloud.com/test_sets/59cb919c-f797-4928-908e-b8cc42e8b5bd

      test_252 failed with the following error:

      Invalid number of mdtlov clients returned by /usr/sbin/lr_reader
      

      mdtlov for MDT0002 seems to be missing, as lr_reader output only shows lustre-MDT0001-mdtlov_UUID and lustre-MDT0003-mdtlov_UUID.
      So MDT target local to MDT0 is missing?

      VVVVVVV DO NOT REMOVE LINES BELOW, Added by Maloo for auto-association VVVVVVV
      sanity test_252 - Invalid number of mdtlov clients returned by /usr/sbin/lr_reader

      Attachments

        Issue Links

          Activity

            [LU-13402] sanity test_252: Invalid number of mdtlov clients returned by /usr/sbin/lr_reader
            pjones Peter Jones added a comment -

            Landed for 2.14

            pjones Peter Jones added a comment - Landed for 2.14

            Oleg Drokin (green@whamcloud.com) merged in patch https://review.whamcloud.com/38138/
            Subject: LU-13402 target: never exclude MDT/OST from last_rcvd
            Project: fs/lustre-release
            Branch: master
            Current Patch Set:
            Commit: 6682b74280ed778f8668f942c808eb70ed7bc67f

            gerrit Gerrit Updater added a comment - Oleg Drokin (green@whamcloud.com) merged in patch https://review.whamcloud.com/38138/ Subject: LU-13402 target: never exclude MDT/OST from last_rcvd Project: fs/lustre-release Branch: master Current Patch Set: Commit: 6682b74280ed778f8668f942c808eb70ed7bc67f

            Alex Zhuravlev (bzzz@whamcloud.com) uploaded a new patch: https://review.whamcloud.com/38138
            Subject: LU-13402 target: never exclude MDT from last_rcvd
            Project: fs/lustre-release
            Branch: master
            Current Patch Set: 1
            Commit: 7962e141c6c6468527b9c329eeaa81b2f8a8f325

            gerrit Gerrit Updater added a comment - Alex Zhuravlev (bzzz@whamcloud.com) uploaded a new patch: https://review.whamcloud.com/38138 Subject: LU-13402 target: never exclude MDT from last_rcvd Project: fs/lustre-release Branch: master Current Patch Set: 1 Commit: 7962e141c6c6468527b9c329eeaa81b2f8a8f325

            This looks to be only failing for the LU-13379 patch.

            adilger Andreas Dilger added a comment - This looks to be only failing for the LU-13379 patch.

            Alex, any thoughts on this? The 38022 patch is failing consistently due to moving the "-o localrecov" flag definition, so it is definitely the fault of the patch.

            adilger Andreas Dilger added a comment - Alex, any thoughts on this? The 38022 patch is failing consistently due to moving the " -o localrecov " flag definition, so it is definitely the fault of the patch.

            This is seen during testing of patch https://review.whamcloud.com/38022 "LU-13379 tests: don't use localrecov for older servers" which just moves the "-o localrecov" setting later in the test setup so that we can check the server version before adding the mount optoin.

            I thought that this patch is identical to the original code, but I'm wondering if somehow "localrecov" is causing the local MDT not to register itself in the last_rcvd file? In the failure case, lustre-MDT0002 is missing from the log on lustre-MDT0000, so it would be a "local" client in that respect.

            adilger Andreas Dilger added a comment - This is seen during testing of patch https://review.whamcloud.com/38022 " LU-13379 tests: don't use localrecov for older servers " which just moves the " -o localrecov " setting later in the test setup so that we can check the server version before adding the mount optoin. I thought that this patch is identical to the original code, but I'm wondering if somehow " localrecov " is causing the local MDT not to register itself in the last_rcvd file? In the failure case, lustre-MDT0002 is missing from the log on lustre-MDT0000 , so it would be a "local" client in that respect.

            People

              bzzz Alex Zhuravlev
              maloo Maloo
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              7 Start watching this issue

              Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: