[gpfsug-discuss] CES doesn't assign addresses to nodes

Wed Feb 1 09:04:14 GMT 2017

>I ll open a pmr here for my env ... the issue may hurt you inralf a ces 
env. only... but needs to be fixed in core gpfs.base  i think

Thanks for opening the PMR.
The problem is inside the gpfs base code and we are working on a fix right 
now.
In the meantime until the fix is available we will use the PMR to 
propose/discuss potential work arounds.

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards

Mathias Dietz

Spectrum Scale - Release Lead Architect (4.2.X Release)
System Health and Problem Determination Architect 
IBM Certified Software Engineer

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IBM Deutschland
Hechtsheimer Str. 2
55131 Mainz
Phone: +49-6131-84-2027
Mobile: +49-15152801035
E-Mail: mdietz at de.ibm.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martina Koederitz, Geschäftsführung: Dirk 
Wittkopp
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, 
HRB 243294

From:   Olaf Weiser/Germany/IBM at IBMDE
To:     "gpfsug main discussion list" <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Cc:     "gpfsug main discussion list" <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Date:   01/31/2017 11:47 PM
Subject:        Re: [gpfsug-discuss] CES doesn't assign addresses to nodes
Sent by:        gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org

Yeah... depending on the #nodes you 're affected or not. .....
So if your remote ces  cluster is small enough in terms of the #nodes ... 
you'll neuer hit into this issue 

Gesendet von IBM Verse

Simon Thompson (Research Computing - IT Services) --- Re: [gpfsug-discuss] 
CES doesn't assign addresses to nodes --- 

Von:
"Simon Thompson (Research Computing - IT Services)" 
<S.J.Thompson at bham.ac.uk>
An:
"gpfsug main discussion list" <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Datum:
Di. 31.01.2017 21:07
Betreff:
Re: [gpfsug-discuss] CES doesn't assign addresses to nodes

We use multicluster for our environment, storage systems in a separate 
cluster to hpc nodes on a separate cluster from protocol nodes.

According to the docs, this isn't supported, but we haven't seen any 
issues. Note unsupported as opposed to broken.

Simon
________________________________________
From: gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org 
[gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org] on behalf of Jonathon A 
Anderson [jonathon.anderson at colorado.edu]
Sent: 31 January 2017 17:47
To: gpfsug main discussion list
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] CES doesn't assign addresses to nodes

Yeah, I searched around for places where ` tsctl shownodes up` appears in 
the GPFS code I have access to (i.e., the ksh and python stuff); but it?s 
only in CES. I suspect there just haven?t been that many people exporting 
CES out of an HPC cluster environment.

~jonathon

From: <gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org> on behalf of Olaf Weiser 
<olaf.weiser at de.ibm.com>
Reply-To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Date: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 10:45 AM
To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] CES doesn't assign addresses to nodes

I ll open a pmr here for my env ... the issue may hurt you in a ces env. 
only... but needs to be fixed in core gpfs.base  i thi k

Gesendet von IBM Verse
Jonathon A Anderson --- Re: [gpfsug-discuss] CES doesn't assign addresses 
to nodes ---

Von:

"Jonathon A Anderson" <jonathon.anderson at colorado.edu>

An:

"gpfsug main discussion list" <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>

Datum:

Di. 31.01.2017 17:32

Betreff:

Re: [gpfsug-discuss] CES doesn't assign addresses to nodes

________________________________

No, I?m having trouble getting this through DDN support because, while we 
have a GPFS server license and GRIDScaler support, apparently we don?t 
have ?protocol node? support, so they?ve pushed back on supporting this as 
an overall CES-rooted effort.

I do have a DDN case open, though: 78804. If you are (as I suspect) a GPFS 
developer, do you mind if I cite your info from here in my DDN case to get 
them to open a PMR?

Thanks.

~jonathon

From: <gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org> on behalf of Olaf Weiser 
<olaf.weiser at de.ibm.com>
Reply-To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Date: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 8:42 AM
To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] CES doesn't assign addresses to nodes

ok.. so obviously ... it seems , that we have several issues..
the 3983 characters is obviously a defect
have you already raised a PMR , if so , can you send me the number ?

From:        Jonathon A Anderson <jonathon.anderson at colorado.edu>
To:        gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Date:        01/31/2017 04:14 PM
Subject:        Re: [gpfsug-discuss] CES doesn't assign addresses to nodes
Sent by:        gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org
________________________________

The tail isn?t the issue; that? my addition, so that I didn?t have to 
paste the hundred or so line nodelist into the thread.

The actual command is

tsctl shownodes up | $tr ',' '\n' | $sort -o $upnodefile

But you can see in my tailed output that the last hostname listed is 
cut-off halfway through the hostname. Less obvious in the example, but 
true, is the fact that it?s only showing the first 120 hosts, when we have 
403 nodes in our gpfs cluster.

[root at sgate2 ~]# tsctl shownodes up | tr ',' '\n' | wc -l
120

[root at sgate2 ~]# mmlscluster | grep '\-opa' | wc -l
403

Perhaps more explicitly, it looks like `tsctl shownodes up` can only 
transmit 3983 characters.

[root at sgate2 ~]# tsctl shownodes up | wc -c
3983

Again, I?m convinced this is a bug not only because the command doesn?t 
actually produce a list of all of the up nodes in our cluster; but because 
the last name listed is incomplete.

[root at sgate2 ~]# tsctl shownodes up | tr ',' '\n' | tail -n 1
shas0260-opa.rc.int.col[root at sgate2 ~]#

I?d continue my investigation within tsctl itself but, alas, it?s a binary 
with no source code available to me. :)

I?m trying to get this opened as a bug / PMR; but I?m still working 
through the DDN support infrastructure. Thanks for reporting it, though.

For the record:

[root at sgate2 ~]# rpm -qa | grep -i gpfs
gpfs.base-4.2.1-2.x86_64
gpfs.msg.en_US-4.2.1-2.noarch
gpfs.gplbin-3.10.0-327.el7.x86_64-4.2.1-0.x86_64
gpfs.gskit-8.0.50-57.x86_64
gpfs.gpl-4.2.1-2.noarch
nfs-ganesha-gpfs-2.3.2-0.ibm24.el7.x86_64
gpfs.ext-4.2.1-2.x86_64
gpfs.gplbin-3.10.0-327.36.3.el7.x86_64-4.2.1-2.x86_64
gpfs.docs-4.2.1-2.noarch

~jonathon

From: <gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org> on behalf of Olaf Weiser 
<olaf.weiser at de.ibm.com>
Reply-To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Date: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 at 1:30 AM
To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Subject: Re: [gpfsug-discuss] CES doesn't assign addresses to nodes

Hi ...same thing here.. everything after 10 nodes will be truncated..
though I don't have an issue with it ... I 'll open a PMR .. and I 
recommend you to do the same thing.. ;-)

the reason seems simple.. it is the "| tail" .at the end of the command.. 
.. which truncates the output to the last 10 items...

should be easy to fix..
cheers
olaf

From:        Jonathon A Anderson <jonathon.anderson at colorado.edu>
To:        "gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org" 
<gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org>
Date:        01/30/2017 11:11 PM
Subject:        Re: [gpfsug-discuss] CES doesn't assign addresses to nodes
Sent by:        gpfsug-discuss-bounces at spectrumscale.org
________________________________

In trying to figure this out on my own, I?m relatively certain I?ve found 
a bug in GPFS related to the truncation of output from `tsctl shownodes 
up`. Any chance someone in development can confirm?

Here are the details of my investigation:

## GPFS is up on sgate2

[root at sgate2 ~]# mmgetstate

Node number  Node name        GPFS state
------------------------------------------
   414      sgate2-opa       active

## but if I tell ces to explicitly put one of our ces addresses on that 
node, it says that GPFS is down

[root at sgate2 ~]# mmces address move --ces-ip 10.225.71.102 --ces-node 
sgate2-opa
mmces address move: GPFS is down on this node.
mmces address move: Command failed. Examine previous error messages to 
determine cause.

## the ?GPFS is down on this node? message is defined as code 109 in 
mmglobfuncs

[root at sgate2 ~]# grep --before-context=1 "GPFS is down on this node." 
/usr/lpp/mmfs/bin/mmglobfuncs
  109 ) msgTxt=\
"%s: GPFS is down on this node."

## and is generated by printErrorMsg in mmcesnetmvaddress when it detects 
that the current node is identified as ?down? by getDownCesNodeList

[root at sgate2 ~]# grep --before-context=5 'printErrorMsg 109' 
/usr/lpp/mmfs/bin/mmcesnetmvaddress
downNodeList=$(getDownCesNodeList)
for downNode in $downNodeList
do
  if [[ $toNodeName == $downNode ]]
  then
    printErrorMsg 109 "$mmcmd"

## getDownCesNodeList is the intersection of all ces nodes with GPFS 
cluster nodes listed in `tsctl shownodes up`

[root at sgate2 ~]# grep --after-context=16 '^function getDownCesNodeList' 
/usr/lpp/mmfs/bin/mmcesfuncs
function getDownCesNodeList
{
typeset sourceFile="mmcesfuncs.sh"
[[ -n $DEBUG || -n $DEBUGgetDownCesNodeList ]] &&set -x
$mmTRACE_ENTER "$*"

typeset upnodefile=${cmdTmpDir}upnodefile
typeset downNodeList

# get all CES nodes
$sort -o $nodefile $mmfsCesNodes.dae

$tsctl shownodes up | $tr ',' '\n' | $sort -o $upnodefile

downNodeList=$($comm -23 $nodefile $upnodefile)
print -- $downNodeList
}  #----- end of function getDownCesNodeList --------------------

## but not only are the sgate nodes not listed by `tsctl shownodes up`; 
its output is obviously and erroneously truncated

[root at sgate2 ~]# tsctl shownodes up | tr ',' '\n' | tail
shas0251-opa.rc.int.colorado.edu
shas0252-opa.rc.int.colorado.edu
shas0253-opa.rc.int.colorado.edu
shas0254-opa.rc.int.colorado.edu
shas0255-opa.rc.int.colorado.edu
shas0256-opa.rc.int.colorado.edu
shas0257-opa.rc.int.colorado.edu
shas0258-opa.rc.int.colorado.edu
shas0259-opa.rc.int.colorado.edu
shas0260-opa.rc.int.col[root at sgate2 ~]#

## I expect that this is a bug in GPFS, likely related to a maximum output 
buffer for `tsctl shownodes up`.

On 1/24/17, 12:48 PM, "Jonathon A Anderson" 
<jonathon.anderson at colorado.edu> wrote:

  I think I'm having the same issue described here:

http://www.spectrumscale.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss/2016-October/002288.html

  Any advice or further troubleshooting steps would be much appreciated. 
Full disclosure: I also have a DDN case open. (78804)

  We've got a four-node (snsd{1..4}) DDN gridscaler system. I'm trying to 
add two CES protocol nodes (sgate{1,2}) to serve NFS.

  Here's the steps I took:

  ---
  mmcrnodeclass protocol -N sgate1-opa,sgate2-opa
  mmcrnodeclass nfs -N sgate1-opa,sgate2-opa
  mmchconfig cesSharedRoot=/gpfs/summit/ces
  mmchcluster --ccr-enable
  mmchnode --ces-enable -N protocol
  mmces service enable NFS
  mmces service start NFS -N nfs
  mmces address add --ces-ip 10.225.71.104,10.225.71.105
  mmces address policy even-coverage
  mmces address move --rebalance
  ---

  This worked the very first time I ran it, but the CES addresses weren't 
re-distributed after restarting GPFS or a node reboot.

  Things I've tried:

  * disabling ces on the sgate nodes and re-running the above procedure
  * moving the cluster and filesystem managers to different snsd nodes
  * deleting and re-creating the cesSharedRoot directory

  Meanwhile, the following log entry appears in mmfs.log.latest every 
~30s:

  ---
  Mon Jan 23 20:31:20 MST 2017: mmcesnetworkmonitor: Found unassigned 
address 10.225.71.104
  Mon Jan 23 20:31:20 MST 2017: mmcesnetworkmonitor: Found unassigned 
address 10.225.71.105
  Mon Jan 23 20:31:20 MST 2017: mmcesnetworkmonitor: handleNetworkProblem 
with lock held: assignIP 10.225.71.104_0-_+,10.225.71.105_0-_+ 1
  Mon Jan 23 20:31:20 MST 2017: mmcesnetworkmonitor: Assigning addresses: 
10.225.71.104_0-_+,10.225.71.105_0-_+
  Mon Jan 23 20:31:20 MST 2017: mmcesnetworkmonitor: moveCesIPs: 
10.225.71.104_0-_+,10.225.71.105_0-_+
  ---

  Also notable, whenever I add or remove addresses now, I see this in 
mmsysmonitor.log (among a lot of other entries):

  ---
  2017-01-23T20:40:56.363 sgate1 D ET_cesnetwork Entity state without 
requireUnique: ces_network_ips_down WARNING No CES relevant NICs detected 
- Service.calculateAndUpdateState:275
  2017-01-23T20:40:11.364 sgate1 D ET_cesnetwork Update multiple entities 
at once {'p2p2': 1, 'bond0': 1, 'p2p1': 1} - Service.setLocalState:333
  ---

  For the record, here's the interface I expect to get the address on 
sgate1:

  ---
  11: bond0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,MASTER,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 9000 qdisc 
noqueue state UP
  link/ether 3c:fd:fe:08:a7:c0 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
  inet 10.225.71.107/20 brd 10.225.79.255 scope global bond0
  valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
  inet6 fe80::3efd:feff:fe08:a7c0/64 scope link
  valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
  ---

  which is a bond of p2p1 and p2p2.

  ---
  6: p2p1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,SLAVE,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 9000 qdisc mq 
master bond0 state UP qlen 1000
  link/ether 3c:fd:fe:08:a7:c0 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
  7: p2p2: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,SLAVE,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 9000 qdisc mq 
master bond0 state UP qlen 1000
  link/ether 3c:fd:fe:08:a7:c0 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
  ---

  A similar bond0 exists on sgate2.

  I crawled around in /usr/lpp/mmfs/lib/mmsysmon/CESNetworkService.py for 
a while trying to figure it out, but have been unsuccessful so far.

_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

_______________________________________________
gpfsug-discuss mailing list
gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org
http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://gpfsug.org/pipermail/gpfsug-discuss_gpfsug.org/attachments/20170201/23ba83c1/attachment-0001.htm>