Uploaded image for project: 'Lustre'
  1. Lustre
  2. LU-3264

recovery-*-scale tests failed with FSTYPE=zfs and FAILURE_MODE=HARD

Details

    • Bug
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Critical
    • Lustre 2.4.1, Lustre 2.5.0
    • Lustre 2.4.0

    • FSTYPE=zfs
      FAILURE_MODE=HARD
    • 3
    • 8083

    Description

      While running recovery-*-scale tests with FSTYPE=zfs and FAILURE_MODE=HARD under failover configuration, the tests failed as follows:

      Failing mds1 on wtm-9vm3
      + pm -h powerman --off wtm-9vm3
      Command completed successfully
      waiting ! ping -w 3 -c 1 wtm-9vm3, 4 secs left ...
      waiting ! ping -w 3 -c 1 wtm-9vm3, 3 secs left ...
      waiting ! ping -w 3 -c 1 wtm-9vm3, 2 secs left ...
      waiting ! ping -w 3 -c 1 wtm-9vm3, 1 secs left ...
      waiting for wtm-9vm3 to fail attempts=3
      + pm -h powerman --off wtm-9vm3
      Command completed successfully
      reboot facets: mds1
      + pm -h powerman --on wtm-9vm3
      Command completed successfully
      Failover mds1 to wtm-9vm7
      04:28:49 (1367234929) waiting for wtm-9vm7 network 900 secs ...
      04:28:49 (1367234929) network interface is UP
      CMD: wtm-9vm7 hostname
      mount facets: mds1
      Starting mds1:   lustre-mdt1/mdt1 /mnt/mds1
      CMD: wtm-9vm7 mkdir -p /mnt/mds1; mount -t lustre   		                   lustre-mdt1/mdt1 /mnt/mds1
      wtm-9vm7: mount.lustre: lustre-mdt1/mdt1 has not been formatted with mkfs.lustre or the backend filesystem type is not supported by this tool
      Start of lustre-mdt1/mdt1 on mds1 failed 19
      

      Maloo report: https://maloo.whamcloud.com/test_sets/ac7cbc10-b0e3-11e2-b2c4-52540035b04c

      Attachments

        Activity

          [LU-3264] recovery-*-scale tests failed with FSTYPE=zfs and FAILURE_MODE=HARD

          can you confirm the patch does work on a local setup?

          bzzz Alex Zhuravlev added a comment - can you confirm the patch does work on a local setup?
          yujian Jian Yu added a comment -

          Patch was landed on master branch.

          yujian Jian Yu added a comment - Patch was landed on master branch.
          yujian Jian Yu added a comment -

          Patch for master branch is in http://review.whamcloud.com/6258.

          yujian Jian Yu added a comment - Patch for master branch is in http://review.whamcloud.com/6258 .

          Thanks, Brian. There's little info like this on the web. (Perhaps it would be worthwhile to add an FAQ entry on zfsonlinux.org sometime.)

          liwei Li Wei (Inactive) added a comment - Thanks, Brian. There's little info like this on the web. (Perhaps it would be worthwhile to add an FAQ entry on zfsonlinux.org sometime.)

          Until we have MMP for ZFS we've resolved this issue by delegating full authority for starting/stopping servers to heartbeat. See the lustre/scripts/Lustre.ha_v2 resource scripts ZPOOL_IMPORT_ARGS='-f' line which is used to always force importing the pool. We also boot all of our nodes diskless so they never have a persistent cache file and thus never get automatically imported. I admit it's a stop gap until we have real MMP, but in practice it's been working thus far.

          behlendorf Brian Behlendorf added a comment - Until we have MMP for ZFS we've resolved this issue by delegating full authority for starting/stopping servers to heartbeat. See the lustre/scripts/Lustre.ha_v2 resource scripts ZPOOL_IMPORT_ARGS='-f' line which is used to always force importing the pool. We also boot all of our nodes diskless so they never have a persistent cache file and thus never get automatically imported. I admit it's a stop gap until we have real MMP, but in practice it's been working thus far.

          This kind of problem is why we would want to have MMP for ZFS, but that hasn't been developed yet. However, for the sake of this bug, we just need to fix the ZFS import problem so that our automated testing scripts work.

          adilger Andreas Dilger added a comment - This kind of problem is why we would want to have MMP for ZFS, but that hasn't been developed yet. However, for the sake of this bug, we just need to fix the ZFS import problem so that our automated testing scripts work.
          yujian Jian Yu added a comment -

          It would be great if two nodes and a shared device are available to experiments.

          Let me setup the test environment and do some experiments.

          yujian Jian Yu added a comment - It would be great if two nodes and a shared device are available to experiments. Let me setup the test environment and do some experiments.

          (CC'ed Brian. How does LLNL implement failovers with ZFS?)

          The pool lustre-mdt1 needs to be imported via "zpool import -f ..." on wtm-9vm7. The tricky part, however, is how to prevent wtm-9vm3 from playing with the pool after rebooting. It might be doable by never caching Lustre pool configurations ("-o cachefile=none" at creation time), so that none of them will be automatically imported anywhere. It would be great if two nodes and a shared device are available to experiments.

          liwei Li Wei (Inactive) added a comment - (CC'ed Brian. How does LLNL implement failovers with ZFS?) The pool lustre-mdt1 needs to be imported via "zpool import -f ..." on wtm-9vm7. The tricky part, however, is how to prevent wtm-9vm3 from playing with the pool after rebooting. It might be doable by never caching Lustre pool configurations ("-o cachefile=none" at creation time), so that none of them will be automatically imported anywhere. It would be great if two nodes and a shared device are available to experiments.

          People

            yujian Jian Yu
            yujian Jian Yu
            Votes:
            0 Vote for this issue
            Watchers:
            12 Start watching this issue

            Dates

              Created:
              Updated:
              Resolved: