Topic
  • 8 replies
  • Latest Post - ‏2012-04-26T15:05:20Z by philgood
philgood
philgood
15 Posts

Pinned topic gpfs and SAMP

‏2012-04-25T11:16:59Z |
hi,

any special hints for integrating gpfs in TSA?
IBM speaks of seamless integration, i'm not sure if there are any special provisions to make.

harvesting sets mounted gpfs-fs to constitute (ResourceType=0) on only one node

regards
Updated on 2012-04-26T15:05:20Z at 2012-04-26T15:05:20Z by philgood
  • philgood
    philgood
    15 Posts

    Re: gpfs and SAMP

    ‏2012-04-25T13:42:40Z  
    additional information
    -> running on Linux/SLES (so harvesting is the only way to get FS to IBM.AgFileSystem)
  • sedgewick_de
    sedgewick_de
    36 Posts

    Re: gpfs and SAMP

    ‏2012-04-25T14:24:55Z  
    Hi Phil,

    there should be a fixed GPFS filesystem resource on all of the nodes. GPFS harvesting makes use of the commands 'mmlsnsd -L' and 'mmlsfs all -o -T -A', so you might try these commands on the nodes where the filesystem resource is not found. If the results look okay, it might be bug.

    Furthermore for cluster file systems there is no aggregation, i.e. no concurrent resource is created. The fixed resources can be added to a filesystem controlling group as non mandatory resources. To base other resources on it, the same fixed resources should be put into a non-controllable equivalency.

    The tight integration between GPFS and TSA refers to basic cluster integrity. A node fencing module allows TSA to expel a node from GPFS when it detects a node failure.

    kind regards,
    Markus
  • philgood
    philgood
    15 Posts

    Re: gpfs and SAMP

    ‏2012-04-25T16:34:10Z  
    hi,

    thank you for fast reponse!

    mm* commands worked fine -> i removed/recreated cluster configuration with mounted gpfs, now harvesting works like expected.

    do i have to put IBM.AgFileSystem to an equivalency(like network interfaces)?
    what do you mean with "filesystem controlling group as non mandatory resources"

    regards
  • sedgewick_de
    sedgewick_de
    36 Posts

    Re: gpfs and SAMP

    ‏2012-04-25T17:04:47Z  
    • philgood
    • ‏2012-04-25T16:34:10Z
    hi,

    thank you for fast reponse!

    mm* commands worked fine -> i removed/recreated cluster configuration with mounted gpfs, now harvesting works like expected.

    do i have to put IBM.AgFileSystem to an equivalency(like network interfaces)?
    what do you mean with "filesystem controlling group as non mandatory resources"

    regards
    Hi Phil,

    if you want to actually start/stop the filesystem resources you need a group.
    So you can either put each single resource into a corresponding group or put all fixed resources into a single group. For the latter you need the non-mandatory attribute - otherwise the group cannot start if a node is missing.

    To keep ocntrol of the filesystem separate from all applications, I proposed to create the equivalency. It allows you to create the following element: Application --(dependsOn)---> Equivalency of filesystems, so that the application is not started, resp. stopped if the filesystem encounters a problem.

    Regards,
    Markus
  • philgood
    philgood
    15 Posts

    Re: gpfs and SAMP

    ‏2012-04-26T09:12:23Z  
    equivalency seems to be the best integration for gpfs-fs, tried following

    Online IBM.ResourceGroup:gpfsRG Request=Online Nominal=Offline
    '- Online IBM.ServiceIP:thacmp01
    |- Offline IBM.ServiceIP:testip:hosta
    '- Online IBM.ServiceIP:testip:hostb
    Online IBM.Equivalency:gpfsEQ
    |- Offline IBM.AgFileSystem:gpfs01:hosta
    '- Online IBM.AgFileSystem:gpfs01:hostb

    shouldn't equ be online on hosta if fs is mounted correctly?
    move didn't work either

    regards
  • sedgewick_de
    sedgewick_de
    36 Posts

    Re: gpfs and SAMP

    ‏2012-04-26T10:16:36Z  
    • philgood
    • ‏2012-04-26T09:12:23Z
    equivalency seems to be the best integration for gpfs-fs, tried following

    Online IBM.ResourceGroup:gpfsRG Request=Online Nominal=Offline
    '- Online IBM.ServiceIP:thacmp01
    |- Offline IBM.ServiceIP:testip:hosta
    '- Online IBM.ServiceIP:testip:hostb
    Online IBM.Equivalency:gpfsEQ
    |- Offline IBM.AgFileSystem:gpfs01:hosta
    '- Online IBM.AgFileSystem:gpfs01:hostb

    shouldn't equ be online on hosta if fs is mounted correctly?
    move didn't work either

    regards
    Hi Phil

    can you make sure that there is a dependency between target equivalency and source testip, resp. thacmp01 resource. lssam -V will display relationship.

    Regards,
    Markus
  • sedgewick_de
    sedgewick_de
    36 Posts

    Re: gpfs and SAMP

    ‏2012-04-26T10:42:08Z  
    Hi Phil

    can you make sure that there is a dependency between target equivalency and source testip, resp. thacmp01 resource. lssam -V will display relationship.

    Regards,
    Markus
    Hi Phil,

    I forgot to say that the equivalency should be made non-controllable with chequ -p O,NoControl . Furthermore - as I described in my previous posts - create a group GPFS_FSRG and add all the gpfs resources to this group as non-mandatory members. Then start this group, so that the filesystems are mounted on all nodes. This will be the default and only node exclusion or node downs will stop/unmount the filesystem.

    The application can now move freely whereever the filesystem is available.

    Regards,
    Markus
  • philgood
    philgood
    15 Posts

    Re: gpfs and SAMP

    ‏2012-04-26T15:05:20Z  
    hi,

    sorry, i think there is a mismatch somewhere:

    created following: no dependency, non-mandatory for IBM.AgFileSystem:gpfs01:

    Offline IBM.ResourceGroup:gpfs_fsRG Request=Online Nominal=Offline
    '- Offline IBM.AgFileSystem:gpfs01 MNT=/var/lib/gpfs
    |- Online IBM.AgFileSystem:gpfs01:hosta
    '- Offline IBM.AgFileSystem:gpfs01:hostb
    Offline IBM.Equivalency:gpfsEQ SelectFromPolicy=ORDERED,NoControl
    |- Online IBM.AgFileSystem:gpfs01:hosta
    '- Offline IBM.AgFileSystem:gpfs01:hostb

    so, moving gpfs_fsRG works fine - mount/umount works as expected, mmshutdown lead to a RG takeover,...
    but, it is not possible to get mount IBM.AgFileSystem:gpfs01 on both nodes working.
    as far as i understand concurrent mode is only possible for IBM.Application Class?

    regards