Hide Forgot
Some of the information in this article is covered in RHEL 6, perhaps enough, but I'm cloning this bug as a placeholder to check whether there's any info in the article that we should also add to the RHEL 6 documentation. +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #712392 +++ Need to integrate the kbase article "How do I gather GFS lockdump information from RHEL 5 to send to Red Hat Support?" into official product docs. Link to kbase article: https://access.redhat.com/kb/docs/DOC-19449 --- Additional comment from swhiteho on 2011-07-04 06:57:07 EDT --- Some notes: 1. for RHEL6 and up, the gfs2_tool gettune command should be replaced with checking the data in /proc/mounts which is much less likely to get stuck if the system is in an odd state, and also is a much better source for such information. 2. If the GFS2 hangalyzer doesn't work, the lock dumps can be obtained manually by using the debugfs file directly. It should be noted as well that using large buffer size in this operation will speed it up considerably when large numbers of glocks are involved, so using dd to copy the information is a much better solution, since bs can be set to something suitably large (e.g. 4M). Otherwise the info looks good to me. --- Additional comment from slevine on 2011-11-01 15:15:54 EDT --- This is an issue for the GFS manual, so it should have been assigned to me. This is the first I'm seeing it, though, and it's past the end of the 5.8 development phase so I'm moving this to 5.9. --- Additional comment from slevine on 2011-11-03 14:20:17 EDT --- Steve: As for point 1: This Bug is for RHEL 5. We cover this to some extent for RHEL 6, with the new documentation for gfs2_tool gettune, but I think I'll clone this for RHEL 6 as a placeholder to check (for the next release) if there's any information in here we don't cover in the RHEL 6 document that we should.
I'm looking at BZ#782801, about a new gfs2_lockgather script, which should address this bug when I document that script. But that script won't make 6.3 -- it will be in 6.4, so I'm moving this bug to 6.4 as well.