# [OmniOS-discuss] [zfs] Re: rpcbind: t_bind failed

Youzhong Yang youzhong at gmail.com
Sun Jan 7 20:15:33 UTC 2018

- Previous message: [OmniOS-discuss] [zfs] Re: rpcbind: t_bind failed
- Next message: [OmniOS-discuss] [zfs] Re: rpcbind: t_bind failed
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

    Not sure if it's the same issue we reported 3 years ago. We applied our
    patch and haven't seen this issue ever since.

    https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/developer/Te5808458a5a5a14f-M74735db9aeccaa5d8c3a70a4

    On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 1:55 PM, Schweiss, Chip <chip at innovates.com> wrote:

    > Hopefully the patch Marcel is talking about fixes this.  I've at least
    > figured out enough to predict when the problem is imminent.
    >
    > We have been migrating to using automounter instead of hard mounts which
    > could to be related to this problem growing over time.
    >
    > Just an FYI:  I've kept the server running in this state, but moved its
    > storage pool to a sister server.   The port binding problem remains with NO
    > NFS clients connected, but neither pfiles or lsof shows rpcbind as the
    > culprit:
    >
    > # netstat -an|grep BOUND|wc -l
    > 32739
    >
    > # /opt/ozmt/bin/SunOS/lsof -i:41155
    >
    > {nothing returned}
    >
    > # pfiles `pgrep rpcbind`
    > 449:    /usr/sbin/rpcbind
    >   Current rlimit: 65536 file descriptors
    >    0: S_IFCHR mode:0666 dev:527,0 ino:70778888 uid:0 gid:3 rdev:135,2
    >       O_RDWR
    >       /devices/pseudo/mm at 0:null
    >       offset:0
    >    1: S_IFCHR mode:0666 dev:527,0 ino:70778888 uid:0 gid:3 rdev:135,2
    >       O_RDWR
    >       /devices/pseudo/mm at 0:null
    >       offset:0
    >    2: S_IFCHR mode:0666 dev:527,0 ino:70778888 uid:0 gid:3 rdev:135,2
    >       O_RDWR
    >       /devices/pseudo/mm at 0:null
    >       offset:0
    >    3: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:61271 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:231,64
    >       O_RDWR
    >         sockname: AF_INET6 ::  port: 111
    >       /devices/pseudo/udp6 at 0:udp6
    >       offset:0
    >    4: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:50998 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:231,59
    >       O_RDWR
    >         sockname: AF_INET6 ::  port: 0
    >       /devices/pseudo/udp6 at 0:udp6
    >       offset:0
    >    5: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:61264 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:231,58
    >       O_RDWR
    >         sockname: AF_INET6 ::  port: 60955
    >       /devices/pseudo/udp6 at 0:udp6
    >       offset:0
    >    6: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:64334 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:224,57
    >       O_RDWR
    >         sockname: AF_INET6 ::  port: 111
    >       /devices/pseudo/tcp6 at 0:tcp6
    >       offset:0
    >    7: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:64333 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:224,56
    >       O_RDWR
    >         sockname: AF_INET6 ::  port: 0
    >       /devices/pseudo/tcp6 at 0:tcp6
    >       offset:0
    >    8: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:64332 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:230,55
    >       O_RDWR
    >         sockname: AF_INET 0.0.0.0  port: 111
    >       /devices/pseudo/udp at 0:udp
    >       offset:0
    >    9: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:64330 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:230,54
    >       O_RDWR
    >         sockname: AF_INET 0.0.0.0  port: 0
    >       /devices/pseudo/udp at 0:udp
    >       offset:0
    >   10: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:64331 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:230,53
    >       O_RDWR
    >         sockname: AF_INET 0.0.0.0  port: 60994
    >       /devices/pseudo/udp at 0:udp
    >       offset:0
    >   11: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:64327 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:223,52
    >       O_RDWR
    >         sockname: AF_INET 0.0.0.0  port: 111
    >       /devices/pseudo/tcp at 0:tcp
    >       offset:0
    >   12: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:64326 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:223,51
    >       O_RDWR
    >         sockname: AF_INET 0.0.0.0  port: 0
    >       /devices/pseudo/tcp at 0:tcp
    >       offset:0
    >   13: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:64324 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:226,32
    >       O_RDWR
    >       /devices/pseudo/tl at 0:ticlts
    >       offset:0
    >   14: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:64328 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:226,33
    >       O_RDWR
    >       /devices/pseudo/tl at 0:ticlts
    >       offset:0
    >   15: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:64324 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:226,35
    >       O_RDWR
    >       /devices/pseudo/tl at 0:ticlts
    >       offset:0
    >   16: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:64322 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:226,36
    >       O_RDWR
    >       /devices/pseudo/tl at 0:ticotsord
    >       offset:0
    >   17: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:64321 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:226,37
    >       O_RDWR
    >       /devices/pseudo/tl at 0:ticotsord
    >       offset:0
    >   18: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:64030 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:226,39
    >       O_RDWR
    >       /devices/pseudo/tl at 0:ticots
    >       offset:0
    >   19: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:64029 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:226,40
    >       O_RDWR
    >       /devices/pseudo/tl at 0:ticots
    >       offset:0
    >   20: S_IFIFO mode:0000 dev:525,0 ino:206 uid:1 gid:12 rdev:0,0
    >       O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK
    >   21: S_IFIFO mode:0000 dev:525,0 ino:206 uid:1 gid:12 rdev:0,0
    >       O_RDWR|O_NONBLOCK
    >   23: S_IFCHR mode:0000 dev:527,0 ino:33089 uid:0 gid:0 rdev:129,21273
    >       O_WRONLY FD_CLOEXEC
    >       /devices/pseudo/log at 0:conslog
    >       offset:0
    >
    > Restarting rpcbind doesn't affect it either:
    >
    > # svcadm restart svc:/network/rpc/bind:default
    >
    > # netstat -an|grep BOUND|wc -l
    > 32739
    >
    > In the interim of this patch getting integrated I'll monitor the number of
    > bound ports to know when I should fail my pool over again.
    >
    >
    > On Wed, Jan 3, 2018 at 10:32 AM, Marcel Telka <marcel at telka.sk> wrote:
    >
    >> On Wed, Jan 03, 2018 at 10:02:43AM -0600, Schweiss, Chip wrote:
    >> > The problem occurred again starting last night.  I have another clue,
    >> but I
    >> > still don't know how it is occurring or how to fix it.
    >> >
    >> > It looks like all the TCP ports are in "bound" state, but not being
    >> > released.
    >> >
    >> > How can I isolate the cause of this?
    >>
    >> This is a bug in rpcmod, very likely related to
    >> https://www.illumos.org/issues/1616
    >>
    >> I discussed this few weeks back with some guy who faced the same issue.
    >> It
    >> looks like he found the cause and have a fix for it.  I thought he will
    >> post a
    >> review request, but that didn't happened for some reason yet.
    >>
    >> I'll try to push this forward...
    >>
    >>
    >> Thanks.
    >>
    >> --
    >> +-------------------------------------------+
    >> | Marcel Telka   e-mail:   marcel at telka.sk  |
    >> |                homepage: http://telka.sk/ |
    >> |                jabber:   marcel at jabber.sk |
    >> +-------------------------------------------+
    >>
    >> ------------------------------------------
    >> illumos-zfs
    >> Archives: https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/zfs/discussions/T8f10bde
    >> 64dc0d5c5-Mb17ca753ce6f6fbed5124147
    >> Powered by Topicbox: https://topicbox.com
    >>
    >
    > *illumos-zfs* | Archives
    > <https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/zfs/discussions/T8f10bde64dc0d5c5-M4fe740db1a7d9f22a30655f7>
    > | Powered by Topicbox <https://topicbox.com>
    >
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: <http://lists.omniti.com/pipermail/omnios-discuss/attachments/20180107/ea8c877a/attachment-0001.html>

- Previous message: [OmniOS-discuss] [zfs] Re: rpcbind: t_bind failed
- Next message: [OmniOS-discuss] [zfs] Re: rpcbind: t_bind failed
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

More information about the OmniOS-discuss mailing list