[LTP] [QUESTION] LTP stress test for RHEL5 and NFS local mount

[LTP] [QUESTION] LTP stress test for RHEL5 and NFS local mount

[gchen]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1035 bytes --]

Hello ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net


Question:

Use ltp stress test (/opt/ltp/ltpstress.sh) with ltp-full-20100331.gz
to test RHEL5 (kernel-2.6.18-308.4.1.el5) for 72 hours.

Not give any more configurations for NFS (using default configuration:
mount NFS locally, so the NFS client and NFS server are on the same
machine).

My question is that "for stress test, is it suitable to let NFS server and
client on the same machine ?"


Background;

This configuration will cause deadlock for RHEL5, and can not boot
machine in normal way.

someone from Red Hat has said that:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Have configuration where the same host is acting as both NFS client
and server. That's a configuration known to cause deadlocks."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

can reference Red Hat Bugzilla (bug 848706) for more details.




thanks.

gchen.

Asianux Corporation.


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1436 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 395 bytes --]

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 155 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

[LTP] [QUESTION] ltp stress test for RHEL5 and NFS local mount

[gchen]

Hello ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net


Question:

Use ltp stress test (/opt/ltp/ltpstress.sh) with ltp-full-20100331.gz
to test RHEL5 (kernel-2.6.18-308.4.1.el5) for 72 hours.

Not give any more configurations for NFS (using default configuration:
mount NFS locally, so the NFS client and NFS server are on the same
machine).

My question is that "for stress test, is it suitable to let NFS server and
client on the same machine ?"


Background;

This configuration will cause deadlock for RHEL5, and can not boot
machine in normal way.

someone from Red Hat has said that:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Have configuration where the same host is acting as both NFS client
and server. That's a configuration known to cause deadlocks."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

can reference Red Hat Bugzilla (bug 848706) for more details.




thanks.

gchen.

Asianux Corporation.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Re: [LTP] [QUESTION] ltp stress test for RHEL5 and NFS local mount

[Garrett Cooper]

On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 10:30 PM, gchen <gang.chen@asianux.com> wrote:
> Hello ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
>
>
> Question:
>
> Use ltp stress test (/opt/ltp/ltpstress.sh) with ltp-full-20100331.gz
> to test RHEL5 (kernel-2.6.18-308.4.1.el5) for 72 hours.
>
> Not give any more configurations for NFS (using default configuration:
> mount NFS locally, so the NFS client and NFS server are on the same
> machine).
>
> My question is that "for stress test, is it suitable to let NFS server and
> client on the same machine ?"
>
>
> Background;
>
> This configuration will cause deadlock for RHEL5, and can not boot
> machine in normal way.
>
> someone from Red Hat has said that:
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "Have configuration where the same host is acting as both NFS client
> and server. That's a configuration known to cause deadlocks."
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> can reference Red Hat Bugzilla (bug 848706) for more details.

    I've done that occasionally on FreeBSD (mount over nfs into a
chroot) before I discovered nullfs (sort of like the unionfs
equivalent on *BSD), but I didn't stress the system. It's an
interesting scenario, but I would say that this is more of a fringe
case than something that one would normally do.
    If it helps you better isolate an issue that occurs in scenarios
where the NFS client/server are separate from one another, I'd say go
for it.
Cheers,
-Garrett

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list

Re: [LTP] [QUESTION] ltp stress test for RHEL5 and NFS local mount

[Chen Gang]

于 2012年09月02日 17:28, Garrett Cooper 写道:
> On Sat, Sep 1, 2012 at 10:30 PM, gchen <gang.chen@asianux.com> wrote:
>> Hello ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
>>
>>
>> Question:
>>
>> Use ltp stress test (/opt/ltp/ltpstress.sh) with ltp-full-20100331.gz
>> to test RHEL5 (kernel-2.6.18-308.4.1.el5) for 72 hours.
>>
>> Not give any more configurations for NFS (using default configuration:
>> mount NFS locally, so the NFS client and NFS server are on the same
>> machine).
>>
>> My question is that "for stress test, is it suitable to let NFS server and
>> client on the same machine ?"
>>
>>
>> Background;
>>
>> This configuration will cause deadlock for RHEL5, and can not boot
>> machine in normal way.
>>
>> someone from Red Hat has said that:
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> "Have configuration where the same host is acting as both NFS client
>> and server. That's a configuration known to cause deadlocks."
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> can reference Red Hat Bugzilla (bug 848706) for more details.
>     I've done that occasionally on FreeBSD (mount over nfs into a
> chroot) before I discovered nullfs (sort of like the unionfs
> equivalent on *BSD), but I didn't stress the system. It's an
> interesting scenario, but I would say that this is more of a fringe
> case than something that one would normally do.
>     If it helps you better isolate an issue that occurs in scenarios
> where the NFS client/server are separate from one another, I'd say go
> for it.
> Cheers,
> -Garrett
>
>

Thank you for your reply.

It will be better if I can get more confirmation from LTP mailing list.

I think;
If we use /opt/ltp/testscript/ltpstress.sh directly, it will use NFS
local mount for stress test.


If no additional reply within this week, I will believe the conclusion
from Red Hat:


-- 
Chen Gang

Asianux Corporation


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and 
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions 
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware 
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Ltp-list mailing list
Ltp-list@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list