[Pvfs2-developers] pvfs2-rm errors, ncache?

[Rob Ross]

should we bump up MAX_NUM_PATHS while we're at it? -- rob

On Jan 4, 2008, at 1:06 PM, Murali Vilayannur wrote:

> yep.. thats right :)
> I think it should be safe to change the strrchr to strchr since it
> seems to fix both the cases..
> thanks,
> Murali
>
> On Jan 4, 2008 9:09 AM, Phil Carns <carns at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>>
>>>> In the case where you keep the logic that is currently in head  
>>>> but just
>>>> change strrchr() to strchr(), what breaks in from the previously  
>>>> reported
>>>> bug?
>>>>
>>>> I tried making that change and it looks like both cases work  
>>>> fine, but I
>>>> may be missing something.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe it has something to do with the number of metadata  
>>>> servers?  I am
>>>> currently trying this with just one server.
>>>
>>>
>>> I tried it again to remind myself.  No segv, but the ls produces the
>>> wrong answer:
>>>
>>> am30$ pvfs2-ls /pvfs/dir1/{0..9} | wc
>>> Ignoring path /pvfs/dir1/8
>>> Ignoring path /pvfs/dir1/9
>>>   4009    4001   15179
>>>
>>> Should be 5000 files, and not say "Ignoring path".
>>>
>>> My setup is CVS head with 1 md+io server, and 1 client, tcp, plus  
>>> removing
>>> exactly one 'r' in sys-lookup.sm.
>>>
>>
>> I think this answer is actually right, or at least as right as  
>> pvfs2-ls
>> will allow :)  pvfs2-ls.c is generating that "Ignoring..." message
>> because it only allows you to list up to MAX_NUM_PATHS (which is  
>> set to
>> 8) paths in a single command line invocation.
>>
>> -Phil
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pvfs2-developers mailing list
>> Pvfs2-developers at beowulf-underground.org
>> http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Pvfs2-developers mailing list
> Pvfs2-developers at beowulf-underground.org
> http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers
>