[Beowulf] GPFS and failed metadata NSD
John Hanks
griznog at gmail.com
Fri May 19 00:39:48 PDT 2017
Thanks Arif, I'm signed up there now.
As a general update, the most recently failed disk of the pair is at a data
recovery company who thinks they can recover a workable image from it. We
should have that back in two or three weeks and will try to use it to
recover the filesystem.
jbh
On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 5:21 PM Arif Ali <mail at arif-ali.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> I would recommend joining up at spectrumscale.org mailing list, where you
> will find very good experts from the HPC industry who know GPFS well,
> including, Vendors, users and integrators. More specifically, you'll you'll
> find gpfs developers on there. Maybe someone on that list can help out
>
> More direct link to the mailing list, here,
> https://www.spectrumscale.org:10000/virtualmin-mailman/unauthenticated/listinfo.cgi/gpfsug-discuss/
>
>
> On 29/04/2017 08:00, John Hanks wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm not getting much useful vendor information so I thought I'd ask here
> in the hopes that a GPFS expert can offer some advice. We have a GPFS
> system which has the following disk config:
>
> [root at grsnas01 ~]# mmlsdisk grsnas_data
> disk driver sector failure holds holds
> storage
> name type size group metadata data status
> availability pool
> ------------ -------- ------ ----------- -------- ----- -------------
> ------------ ------------
> SAS_NSD_00 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_01 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_02 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_03 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_04 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_05 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_06 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_07 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_08 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_09 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_10 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_11 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_12 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_13 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_14 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_15 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_16 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_17 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_18 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_19 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_20 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SAS_NSD_21 nsd 512 100 No Yes ready up
> system
> SSD_NSD_23 nsd 512 200 Yes No ready up
> system
> SSD_NSD_24 nsd 512 200 Yes No ready up
> system
> SSD_NSD_25 nsd 512 200 Yes No to be emptied down
> system
> SSD_NSD_26 nsd 512 200 Yes No ready up
> system
>
> SSD_NSD_25 is a mirror in which both drives have failed due to a series of
> unfortunate events and will not be coming back. From the GPFS
> troubleshooting guide it appears that my only alternative is to run
>
> mmdeldisk grsnas_data SSD_NSD_25 -p
>
> around which the documentation also warns is irreversible, the sky is
> likely to fall, dogs and cats sleeping together, etc. But at this point I'm
> already in an irreversible situation. Of course this is a scratch
> filesystem, of course people were warned repeatedly about the risk of using
> a scratch filesystem that is not backed up and of course many ignored that.
> I'd like to recover as much as possible here. Can anyone confirm/reject
> that deleting this disk is the best way forward or if there are other
> alternatives to recovering data from GPFS in this situation?
>
> Any input is appreciated. Adding salt to the wound is that until a few
> months ago I had a complete copy of this filesystem that I had made onto
> some new storage as a burn-in test but then removed as that storage was
> consumed... As they say, sometimes you eat the bear, and sometimes, well,
> the bear eats you.
>
> Thanks,
>
> jbh
>
> (Naively calculated probability of these two disks failing close together
> in this array: 0.00001758. I never get this lucky when buying lottery
> tickets.)
> --
> ‘[A] talent for following the ways of yesterday, is not sufficient to
> improve the world of today.’
> - King Wu-Ling, ruler of the Zhao state in northern China, 307 BC
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing
> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
>
>
> --
> regards,
>
> Arif Ali
> Mob: +447970148122 <+44%207970%20148122>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org sponsored by Penguin Computing
> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
> http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
>
--
‘[A] talent for following the ways of yesterday, is not sufficient to
improve the world of today.’
- King Wu-Ling, ruler of the Zhao state in northern China, 307 BC
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.beowulf.org/pipermail/beowulf/attachments/20170519/cabd5cc7/attachment.html>
More information about the Beowulf
mailing list