[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       lustre-discuss
Subject:    [lustre-discuss] OST replacement procedure
From:       Thomas Roth via lustre-discuss <lustre-discuss () lists ! lustre ! org>
Date:       2022-10-26 7:32:57
Message-ID: 3ae17e18-9d07-92b6-f978-8f0effbf339a () gsi ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

Hi all,

about the correct procedure to replace an OST:
I read the recent issues reported here by Robert Redl, the LU-15000 by Stephane and \
in particular his talk at LAD22:

Why is it important to _not_ reuse old OST indices?



Understandable if you want to remove the OST, but not replace it.

In the past - I think in Lustre 1.8 - when there was no "mkfs.lustre --replace" \
available, over time we ended up with a long list of OSTs continually  'lctl \
--deactivate'd on all clients, very ugly. And were so happy when explicit indices and \
'--replace' were introduced, in particular because I was terribly afraid of creating \
holes in the list of  active OSTs ('holes' might have been a No-No in some past \
version?)



Nowadays, everybody wants to avoid old OST incides - with 'lctl --del-ost' a specific \
command for doing that comfortably is developed. Why?


Best regards,
Thomas
-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Roth           IT-HPC-Linux
Location: SB3 2.291   Phone: 1453

_______________________________________________
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]