[Linux-cluster] gfs+nfs+lucene, anyone had tried?

[ESGLinux]

Hi,

in the file /var/lib/nfs/etabI get this:

/nfsdata
 nodo1(rw,sync,wdelay,hide,nocrossmnt,secure,no_root_squash,no_all_squash,no_subtree_check,secure_locks,acl,fsid=45793,mapping=identity,anonuid=65534,anongid=65534)

the version of nfs are this:

nfs-utils-1.0.9-42.el5
nfs-utils-lib-1.0.8-7.6.el5

thanks

ESG


2010/4/21 Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho at redhat.com>

> Hi,
>
> Did you set fsid= on the export? Which NFS version are you using?
>
> Steve.
>
> On Wed, 2010-04-21 at 17:00 +0200, ESGLinux wrote:
> > HI,
> >
> >
> > look at the error that happens when two nodes are writing to the
> > index:
> >
> >
> >  java.io.IOException: Stale NFS file handle
> >         at java.io.RandomAccessFile.writeBytes(Native Method)
> >         at java.io.RandomAccessFile.write(RandomAccessFile.java:466)
> >         at
> > org.apache.lucene.store.FSIndexOutput.flushBuffer(FSDirectory.java:503)
> >         at
> >
> org.apache.lucene.store.BufferedIndexOutput.flush(BufferedIndexOutput.java:84)
> >         at
> >
> org.apache.lucene.store.BufferedIndexOutput.close(BufferedIndexOutput.java:98)
> >         at
> > org.apache.lucene.store.FSIndexOutput.close(FSDirectory.java:506)
> >         at
> > org.apache.lucene.index.FieldsWriter.close(FieldsWriter.java:48)
> >         at
> > org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentMerger.mergeFields(SegmentMerger.java:191)
> >         at
> > org.apache.lucene.index.SegmentMerger.merge(SegmentMerger.java:88)
> >         at
> > org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.mergeSegments(IndexWriter.java:709)
> >         at
> > org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.mergeSegments(IndexWriter.java:686)
> >         at
> > org.apache.lucene.index.IndexWriter.optimize(IndexWriter.java:543)
> >
> > I think in this case one node has writen to the index and the other
> > don´t. Could it be a problem? does GFS anything with this situation?
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> >
> > ESG
> >
> >
> >
> > 2010/4/21 Jeff Sturm <jeff.sturm at eprize.com>
> >         We use Lucene over GFS (no NFS), but the design of our
> >         application updates Lucene from only one node at a time.
> >
> >
> >
> >         In general applications that utilize POSIX locking can handle
> >         concurrent updates safely on GFS even with multiple nodes.  It
> >         wasn't clear to us whether Lucene supports this, however, and
> >         in your case NFS adds a layer to the mix.
> >
> >
> >
> >         From:linux-cluster-bounces at redhat.com<From%3Alinux-cluster-bounces at redhat.com>
> >         [mailto:linux-cluster-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of
> >         ESGLinux
> >         Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2010 8:22 AM
> >         To: linux clustering
> >         Subject: [Linux-cluster] gfs+nfs+lucene, anyone had tried?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >         Hi All,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >         I´m mounting a cluster using NFS over GFS and I´m going to
> >         store a lucene index on it.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >         There are two nodes that write in this index, and I´m worried
> >         about the index corruption.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >         So anyone have implemented something like this? any problem I
> >         can find?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >         Thanks in advance,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >         ESG
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >         --
> >         Linux-cluster mailing list
> >         Linux-cluster at redhat.com
> >         https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
> >
> >
> > --
> > Linux-cluster mailing list
> > Linux-cluster at redhat.com
> > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>
>
> --
> Linux-cluster mailing list
> Linux-cluster at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-cluster
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/linux-cluster/attachments/20100421/832d9fc5/attachment.htm>