Hi there,
> I would suggest to add a config switch to choose between early
> unlinking and removing at shutdown. Because I'm using a setup where
> the rootfs are shared between several hosts and an container may be
> run on any of it. For this usecase, the rootfs pinmarker is a (not
> perfect but)
Hello,
I'm late but I just want to mention that I expect that all this kind of
"unlinking" on a NFS will show up as a stale NFS handle, i.e. a still visible
hidden directory entry (.nfs00??). Therefore, one have to
take care of this (i.e. exclude) if he make a copy of such (
Dear Christian,
>It was, but there was/is no O_EXCL in the open() command, so a
>pre-existing .hold file was never a reason for the container
>startup to fail. (Which was necessary because they were never
>removed on shutdown previously.) So in that sense, this behavior
>hasn't changed.
I'm sorry
Quoting Jäkel, Guido (g.jae...@dnb.de):
> Hello,
>
> I'm late but I just want to mention that I expect that all this kind of
> "unlinking" on a NFS will show up as a stale NFS handle, i.e. a still visible
> hidden directory entry (.nfs00??). Therefore, one have to
> take car
Hi Çağlar
I was trying out your new test (with one small change, I made it use
busybox instead of ubuntu during the creates since busybox is a bit
simpler). I put it in a while true shell loop, and it goes for a few
iterations but then the error I get is:
[...]
Executing (create) for 5 containers
Hey Tony!
I've kept meaning to revisit this and answer your question...
On Wed, 2013-09-04 at 10:23 -0700, Tony Su wrote:
> Thx for the thoughts, Michael...
>
> Would like to know specifically what you believe is incompatible
> running 0.8.0 with systemd.
Ok... Here are the things we know ab
On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 07:56 -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Jäkel, Guido (g.jae...@dnb.de):
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm late but I just want to mention that I expect that all this kind
> of "unlinking" on a NFS will show up as a stale NFS handle, i.e. a
> still visible hidden directory entry (.nf
On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 10:28 -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Michael H. Warfield (m...@wittsend.com):
> > On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 07:56 -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > > Quoting Jäkel, Guido (g.jae...@dnb.de):
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I'm late but I just want to mention that I expect that
Quoting Michael H. Warfield (m...@wittsend.com):
> On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 07:56 -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> > Quoting Jäkel, Guido (g.jae...@dnb.de):
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I'm late but I just want to mention that I expect that all this kind
> > of "unlinking" on a NFS will show up as a stale N
On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 12:18 -0400, Stéphane Graber wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 05:11:37PM +0100, Christian Seiler wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > > Concur on the revert.
> > >
> > > What is really gained by deleting that file? I agree with the basic
> > > idea of moving and renaming that file
Hi there,
> Concur on the revert.
>
> What is really gained by deleting that file? I agree with the basic
> idea of moving and renaming that file to hold the mount open but, are
> we
> really that worried that someone will inadvertently delete that file?
> It shouldn't be a security issue and I
Hi Dwight,
Yes, I only observed a hang so far but not this assertion (in fact I don't
remember ever seeing that). What I'm seeing is this;
* lxc-test-concurrent get stuck
[caglar@qgq:~] sudo lxc-test-concurrent
Executing (create) for 5 containers...
* ps auwxf shows this (so no rsync etc. runni
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 05:11:37PM +0100, Christian Seiler wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> > Concur on the revert.
> >
> > What is really gained by deleting that file? I agree with the basic
> > idea of moving and renaming that file to hold the mount open but, are
> > we
> > really that worried that some
Signed-off-by: S.Çağlar Onur
---
src/tests/concurrent.c | 10 +-
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/tests/concurrent.c b/src/tests/concurrent.c
index 41c171b..7faf34c 100644
--- a/src/tests/concurrent.c
+++ b/src/tests/concurrent.c
@@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ void * co
Quoting S.Çağlar Onur (cag...@10ur.org):
> Signed-off-by: S.Çağlar Onur
Acked-by: Serge E. Hallyn
thanks, applied.
> ---
> src/tests/concurrent.c | 10 +-
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/src/tests/concurrent.c b/src/tests/concurrent.c
> index 41c171b
Branch: refs/heads/staging
Home: https://github.com/lxc/lxc
Commit: b130964dd7faf19abc7afde7eebe7905a0fe8661
https://github.com/lxc/lxc/commit/b130964dd7faf19abc7afde7eebe7905a0fe8661
Author: S.Çağlar Onur
Date: 2013-09-13 (Fri, 13 Sep 2013)
Changed paths:
M src/tests/co
Otherwise user-namespace containers will hang on mountall.
Signed-off-by: Serge Hallyn
---
templates/lxc-ubuntu-cloud.in | 1 +
templates/lxc-ubuntu.in | 1 +
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/templates/lxc-ubuntu-cloud.in b/templates/lxc-ubuntu-cloud.in
index 0abc932..b024de8
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 03:43:56PM -0500, Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Otherwise user-namespace containers will hang on mountall.
>
> Signed-off-by: Serge Hallyn
Acked-by: Stéphane Graber
I'll cherry-pick that in the Ubuntu package.
> ---
> templates/lxc-ubuntu-cloud.in | 1 +
> templates/lxc-ubunt
Branch: refs/heads/staging
Home: https://github.com/lxc/lxc
Commit: 84bce17b8bc5c69e8dce03457a5f7859e0b46940
https://github.com/lxc/lxc/commit/84bce17b8bc5c69e8dce03457a5f7859e0b46940
Author: Serge Hallyn
Date: 2013-09-13 (Fri, 13 Sep 2013)
Changed paths:
M templates/lxc
Tony:
On Fri, 2013-09-13 at 00:20 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-09-12 at 15:23 -0400, Michael H. Warfield wrote:
> > All - Especially Tony Su,
>
> > Couple of people where I work thought you couldn't do what I was trying
> > to do, that it was "impossible". Oh well. Looks l
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 12:09:55 -0400
S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
> Hi Dwight,
>
> Yes, I only observed a hang so far but not this assertion (in fact I
> don't remember ever seeing that). What I'm seeing is this;
Okay, something funny is going on, but I don't know what yet. That
assertion is coming from
Signed-off-by: S.Çağlar Onur
---
src/lxc/lxccontainer.c | 119 +++--
src/lxc/lxccontainer.h | 1 +
2 files changed, 97 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/lxc/lxccontainer.c b/src/lxc/lxccontainer.c
index 79237df..14b6942 100644
--- a/src
Hi,
Seems like "git send-mail" decided to send this without an explanation. So
here it is;
While implementing get_ips API for Go bindings I realized that function can
receive an interface name as a parameter. There was no way to find the
interface names from the container so this patch introduces
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 06:21:20PM -0400, S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
> Signed-off-by: S.Çağlar Onur
The loopback filtering was there so that all the software using get_ips
to wait for the container to be reachable would work.
Your change will essentially force everyone to do two calls, one for all
inte
Hey Stéphane,
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Stéphane Graber wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 06:21:20PM -0400, S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: S.Çağlar Onur
>
> The loopback filtering was there so that all the software using get_ips
> to wait for the container to be reachable would wo
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 06:44:34PM -0400, S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
> Hey Stéphane,
>
> On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Stéphane Graber wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 06:21:20PM -0400, S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: S.Çağlar Onur
> >
> > The loopback filtering was there so that all
On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 17:29:53 -0400
Dwight Engen wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 12:09:55 -0400
> S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
>
> > Hi Dwight,
> >
> > Yes, I only observed a hang so far but not this assertion (in fact I
> > don't remember ever seeing that). What I'm seeing is this;
>
> Okay, something f
Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 17:29:53 -0400
> Dwight Engen wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 12:09:55 -0400
> > S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Dwight,
> > >
> > > Yes, I only observed a hang so far but not this assertion (in fact I
> > > don't remembe
Hi Dwight,
Yes it only stuck during creating concurrent containers for me and
start/stop/freeze/unfreeze seems to work fine. If it helps I'm pretty sure
that it was working fine till last week (or I was so lucky not to hit by
this problem before). Go binding's test suite does lots of concurrent st
Quoting Serge Hallyn (serge.hal...@ubuntu.com):
> Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> > On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 17:29:53 -0400
> > Dwight Engen wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 12:09:55 -0400
> > > S.Çağlar Onur wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Dwight,
> > > >
> > > > Yes, I only observed
30 matches
Mail list logo
