The government agecy I work with uses HDF5 in many steps of its processes.
We have been using hdf5-1.8.5, from your binary distribution site. We're
running it on RHEL5.x. The RPM we are using is
hdf5-1.8.5-1.with.szip.encoder.el5.x86_64.rpm .
But we're having an issue with h5copy aborting when a file system fills up.
Our process has a work-around in place that detects the abort, initiates a
cleanup on the file system, and retries the operation when there is more
space available, but it doesn't really do what we'd like because it wastes
system and database resources to accomplish it.
One of our analysts had located a fix for the problem in hdf5-1.8.9, and
wanted it put on our development servers.
The Technical Notes at
http://www.hdfgroup.org/HDF5/doc/TechNotes/Version.html
seem to say that 1.8.5 and 1.8.9 should be compatible. But we're finding
that we can't have a program compiled and loaded with shared libraries on
1.8.9 run on a server with shared libraries and 1.8.5 installed. The
reverse is also a problem. In one case, it complains about xxxxx.so.7 or
xxxxx.so.7.0.3 not being there, and in another, it is 6.0.4 (I think). I've
tried various compile options and environment variables, but have yet to
come across the magic combination that will cure it.
Does anyone have any advice on how to proceed? The binary distribution for
the 1.8.9 version is:
hdf5-1.8.9-1.with.szip.encoder.el5.x86_64.rpm.
Where we are at now is that, until we can fully synchronize base software
for our released code with development code, we need to have development on
one version and operations on the other. It doesn't really matter all that
much which version, either, as long as we can continue to operate without a
full application rebuild (all programs) and we can apply emergency patchies
piecemeal if necessary. We just don't want to have to manage a full release
to get this fix in unless absolutely necessary because it would require a
full cycle of testing just for it, and the government usually prefers
avoiding that.
I would appreciate any help that can be provided.
Hi,
Try setting the 'HDF5_DISABLE_VERSION_CHECK' environment variable to '1' or '2'.
Quincey
···
On Aug 15, 2012, at 5:09 PM, agatometer wrote:
The government agecy I work with uses HDF5 in many steps of its processes. We have been using hdf5-1.8.5, from your binary distribution site. We're running it on RHEL5.x. The RPM we are using is
hdf5-1.8.5-1.with.szip.encoder.el5.x86_64.rpm .
But we're having an issue with h5copy aborting when a file system fills up. Our process has a work-around in place that detects the abort, initiates a cleanup on the file system, and retries the operation when there is more space available, but it doesn't really do what we'd like because it wastes system and database resources to accomplish it.
One of our analysts had located a fix for the problem in hdf5-1.8.9, and wanted it put on our development servers.
The Technical Notes at
http://www.hdfgroup.org/HDF5/doc/TechNotes/Version.html
seem to say that 1.8.5 and 1.8.9 should be compatible. But we're finding that we can't have a program compiled and loaded with shared libraries on 1.8.9 run on a server with shared libraries and 1.8.5 installed. The reverse is also a problem. In one case, it complains about xxxxx.so.7 or xxxxx.so.7.0.3 not being there, and in another, it is 6.0.4 (I think). I've tried various compile options and environment variables, but have yet to come across the magic combination that will cure it.
Does anyone have any advice on how to proceed? The binary distribution for the 1.8.9 version is:
hdf5-1.8.9-1.with.szip.encoder.el5.x86_64.rpm.
Where we are at now is that, until we can fully synchronize base software for our released code with development code, we need to have development on one version and operations on the other. It doesn't really matter all that much which version, either, as long as we can continue to operate without a full application rebuild (all programs) and we can apply emergency patchies piecemeal if necessary. We just don't want to have to manage a full release to get this fix in unless absolutely necessary because it would require a full cycle of testing just for it, and the government usually prefers avoiding that.
I would appreciate any help that can be provided.
_______________________________________________
Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion.
Hdf-forum@hdfgroup.org
http://mail.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_hdfgroup.org
