“Too many levels of symbolic links” in NFS via automount resolved by restarting DockerIs there a way to make a browse-able automount directory without mounting the subdirectories?cross-syncing home directories with disconnected operation (Linux/Ubuntu)Automount directories only on certain clients via NIS and NFSWhy do some host volumes in Docker containers give the error “too many levels of symbolic links”?MySQL, NFS and symbolic linksVanishing network connectivity in HPC cluster

Why do UK politicians seemingly ignore opinion polls on Brexit?

aging parents with no investments

Is ipsum/ipsa/ipse a third person pronoun, or can it serve other functions?

How can I add custom success page

How to deal with fear of taking dependencies

Does a dangling wire really electrocute me if I'm standing in water?

Filling an area between two curves

What is it called when one voice type sings a 'solo'?

How to make payment on the internet without leaving a money trail?

Was there ever an axiom rendered a theorem?

Is domain driven design an anti-SQL pattern?

What happens when a metallic dragon and a chromatic dragon mate?

Extreme, but not acceptable situation and I can't start the work tomorrow morning

What to wear for invited talk in Canada

Why doesn't a const reference extend the life of a temporary object passed via a function?

Where to refill my bottle in India?

"My colleague's body is amazing"

What do the Banks children have against barley water?

Why was the "bread communication" in the arena of Catching Fire left out in the movie?

Pristine Bit Checking

Where else does the Shulchan Aruch quote an authority by name?

Why do we use polarized capacitors?

Can a planet have a different gravitational pull depending on its location in orbit around its sun?

Can the Produce Flame cantrip be used to grapple, or as an unarmed strike, in the right circumstances?



“Too many levels of symbolic links” in NFS via automount resolved by restarting Docker


Is there a way to make a browse-able automount directory without mounting the subdirectories?cross-syncing home directories with disconnected operation (Linux/Ubuntu)Automount directories only on certain clients via NIS and NFSWhy do some host volumes in Docker containers give the error “too many levels of symbolic links”?MySQL, NFS and symbolic linksVanishing network connectivity in HPC cluster






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty height:90px;width:728px;box-sizing:border-box;








0















This is bizarre and while I have a workaround, I'd prefer a permanent fix.



I have a small group of GPU machines running Ubuntu 14.04 which I am using as workers for a cloud service that's effected via Docker images. I have nvidia-docker installed on all the worker machines, so that docker has access to the GPUs. The worker machines also function as individual servers which lab members can do experiments on directly (academic environment, the cloud service is experimental, etc). For the latter purpose, all the machines automount individual user shares over NFS. We recently switched to automount from a static fstab configuration, and I'm still getting used to it -- it's entirely possible there's some obvious issue at play here I'm not seeing because I'm an automount n00b. Finally, I haven't set anything up for docker images to be able to access the NFS shares, so in theory there should be no connection... in theory.



This week one of our lab members reported the Too many levels of symbolic links error when attempting to access their share drive from one of the GPU machines. They're not using docker at all (to their knowledge). There are no questionable symbolic links in their tree (via find -type l), so it has to be something else getting into a weird state. The mount point looks like this under ls -l from the parent directory:



dr-xr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Dec 5 18:38 labmember1


which seems... bad? root:root 555, really? and when you try to browse it you get, indeed:



$ cd /path/to/labmember1/
-bash: cd: /path/to/labmember1/: Too many levels of symbolic links


The share doesn't seem to actually be mounted -- it does not appear in /etc/mtab, and (predictably) attempts to unmount it manually report:



$ sudo umount /path/to/labmember1/
umount: /path/to/labmember1/: not mounted


Restarting autofs (service autofs restart) did nothing.



What I thought was unrelated at the time: docker had been spewing veth interfaces everywhere. This was a machine being actively used as a cloud worker, so I figured it was our cloud software. Now I'm not so sure.



Today the Too many levels of symbolic links failure occurred on another GPU machine, which has docker/nvidia-docker installed but does not run the cloud worker software. Lo and behold, veth interfaces everywhere, though in far fewer numbers than on the cloud worker machine.



On a whim, I stopped the docker service (service docker stop). Magic! The share mounts normally and our lab member can use their stuff again. The share remains in working condition after starting docker back up again.



So I can clearly fix this issue by restarting docker if(when) it happens again, but I'd like to know



  1. what is causing this in the first place? or, how can I find out?

  2. is there a way to prevent this from happening again, or am I stuck just fixing it every time it breaks?









share|improve this question






















  • Was any explanation found for this behavior? I'm seeing the same things: I installed nvidia-docker on an Ubuntu 16.04 machine and restarting docker fixes the "Too many levels of symbolic links" problem.

    – Randall Radmer
    Feb 26 at 23:15

















0















This is bizarre and while I have a workaround, I'd prefer a permanent fix.



I have a small group of GPU machines running Ubuntu 14.04 which I am using as workers for a cloud service that's effected via Docker images. I have nvidia-docker installed on all the worker machines, so that docker has access to the GPUs. The worker machines also function as individual servers which lab members can do experiments on directly (academic environment, the cloud service is experimental, etc). For the latter purpose, all the machines automount individual user shares over NFS. We recently switched to automount from a static fstab configuration, and I'm still getting used to it -- it's entirely possible there's some obvious issue at play here I'm not seeing because I'm an automount n00b. Finally, I haven't set anything up for docker images to be able to access the NFS shares, so in theory there should be no connection... in theory.



This week one of our lab members reported the Too many levels of symbolic links error when attempting to access their share drive from one of the GPU machines. They're not using docker at all (to their knowledge). There are no questionable symbolic links in their tree (via find -type l), so it has to be something else getting into a weird state. The mount point looks like this under ls -l from the parent directory:



dr-xr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Dec 5 18:38 labmember1


which seems... bad? root:root 555, really? and when you try to browse it you get, indeed:



$ cd /path/to/labmember1/
-bash: cd: /path/to/labmember1/: Too many levels of symbolic links


The share doesn't seem to actually be mounted -- it does not appear in /etc/mtab, and (predictably) attempts to unmount it manually report:



$ sudo umount /path/to/labmember1/
umount: /path/to/labmember1/: not mounted


Restarting autofs (service autofs restart) did nothing.



What I thought was unrelated at the time: docker had been spewing veth interfaces everywhere. This was a machine being actively used as a cloud worker, so I figured it was our cloud software. Now I'm not so sure.



Today the Too many levels of symbolic links failure occurred on another GPU machine, which has docker/nvidia-docker installed but does not run the cloud worker software. Lo and behold, veth interfaces everywhere, though in far fewer numbers than on the cloud worker machine.



On a whim, I stopped the docker service (service docker stop). Magic! The share mounts normally and our lab member can use their stuff again. The share remains in working condition after starting docker back up again.



So I can clearly fix this issue by restarting docker if(when) it happens again, but I'd like to know



  1. what is causing this in the first place? or, how can I find out?

  2. is there a way to prevent this from happening again, or am I stuck just fixing it every time it breaks?









share|improve this question






















  • Was any explanation found for this behavior? I'm seeing the same things: I installed nvidia-docker on an Ubuntu 16.04 machine and restarting docker fixes the "Too many levels of symbolic links" problem.

    – Randall Radmer
    Feb 26 at 23:15













0












0








0


2






This is bizarre and while I have a workaround, I'd prefer a permanent fix.



I have a small group of GPU machines running Ubuntu 14.04 which I am using as workers for a cloud service that's effected via Docker images. I have nvidia-docker installed on all the worker machines, so that docker has access to the GPUs. The worker machines also function as individual servers which lab members can do experiments on directly (academic environment, the cloud service is experimental, etc). For the latter purpose, all the machines automount individual user shares over NFS. We recently switched to automount from a static fstab configuration, and I'm still getting used to it -- it's entirely possible there's some obvious issue at play here I'm not seeing because I'm an automount n00b. Finally, I haven't set anything up for docker images to be able to access the NFS shares, so in theory there should be no connection... in theory.



This week one of our lab members reported the Too many levels of symbolic links error when attempting to access their share drive from one of the GPU machines. They're not using docker at all (to their knowledge). There are no questionable symbolic links in their tree (via find -type l), so it has to be something else getting into a weird state. The mount point looks like this under ls -l from the parent directory:



dr-xr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Dec 5 18:38 labmember1


which seems... bad? root:root 555, really? and when you try to browse it you get, indeed:



$ cd /path/to/labmember1/
-bash: cd: /path/to/labmember1/: Too many levels of symbolic links


The share doesn't seem to actually be mounted -- it does not appear in /etc/mtab, and (predictably) attempts to unmount it manually report:



$ sudo umount /path/to/labmember1/
umount: /path/to/labmember1/: not mounted


Restarting autofs (service autofs restart) did nothing.



What I thought was unrelated at the time: docker had been spewing veth interfaces everywhere. This was a machine being actively used as a cloud worker, so I figured it was our cloud software. Now I'm not so sure.



Today the Too many levels of symbolic links failure occurred on another GPU machine, which has docker/nvidia-docker installed but does not run the cloud worker software. Lo and behold, veth interfaces everywhere, though in far fewer numbers than on the cloud worker machine.



On a whim, I stopped the docker service (service docker stop). Magic! The share mounts normally and our lab member can use their stuff again. The share remains in working condition after starting docker back up again.



So I can clearly fix this issue by restarting docker if(when) it happens again, but I'd like to know



  1. what is causing this in the first place? or, how can I find out?

  2. is there a way to prevent this from happening again, or am I stuck just fixing it every time it breaks?









share|improve this question














This is bizarre and while I have a workaround, I'd prefer a permanent fix.



I have a small group of GPU machines running Ubuntu 14.04 which I am using as workers for a cloud service that's effected via Docker images. I have nvidia-docker installed on all the worker machines, so that docker has access to the GPUs. The worker machines also function as individual servers which lab members can do experiments on directly (academic environment, the cloud service is experimental, etc). For the latter purpose, all the machines automount individual user shares over NFS. We recently switched to automount from a static fstab configuration, and I'm still getting used to it -- it's entirely possible there's some obvious issue at play here I'm not seeing because I'm an automount n00b. Finally, I haven't set anything up for docker images to be able to access the NFS shares, so in theory there should be no connection... in theory.



This week one of our lab members reported the Too many levels of symbolic links error when attempting to access their share drive from one of the GPU machines. They're not using docker at all (to their knowledge). There are no questionable symbolic links in their tree (via find -type l), so it has to be something else getting into a weird state. The mount point looks like this under ls -l from the parent directory:



dr-xr-xr-x 2 root root 0 Dec 5 18:38 labmember1


which seems... bad? root:root 555, really? and when you try to browse it you get, indeed:



$ cd /path/to/labmember1/
-bash: cd: /path/to/labmember1/: Too many levels of symbolic links


The share doesn't seem to actually be mounted -- it does not appear in /etc/mtab, and (predictably) attempts to unmount it manually report:



$ sudo umount /path/to/labmember1/
umount: /path/to/labmember1/: not mounted


Restarting autofs (service autofs restart) did nothing.



What I thought was unrelated at the time: docker had been spewing veth interfaces everywhere. This was a machine being actively used as a cloud worker, so I figured it was our cloud software. Now I'm not so sure.



Today the Too many levels of symbolic links failure occurred on another GPU machine, which has docker/nvidia-docker installed but does not run the cloud worker software. Lo and behold, veth interfaces everywhere, though in far fewer numbers than on the cloud worker machine.



On a whim, I stopped the docker service (service docker stop). Magic! The share mounts normally and our lab member can use their stuff again. The share remains in working condition after starting docker back up again.



So I can clearly fix this issue by restarting docker if(when) it happens again, but I'd like to know



  1. what is causing this in the first place? or, how can I find out?

  2. is there a way to prevent this from happening again, or am I stuck just fixing it every time it breaks?






docker nfs automount autofs nvidia






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Dec 21 '17 at 21:50









krivardkrivard

1336




1336












  • Was any explanation found for this behavior? I'm seeing the same things: I installed nvidia-docker on an Ubuntu 16.04 machine and restarting docker fixes the "Too many levels of symbolic links" problem.

    – Randall Radmer
    Feb 26 at 23:15

















  • Was any explanation found for this behavior? I'm seeing the same things: I installed nvidia-docker on an Ubuntu 16.04 machine and restarting docker fixes the "Too many levels of symbolic links" problem.

    – Randall Radmer
    Feb 26 at 23:15
















Was any explanation found for this behavior? I'm seeing the same things: I installed nvidia-docker on an Ubuntu 16.04 machine and restarting docker fixes the "Too many levels of symbolic links" problem.

– Randall Radmer
Feb 26 at 23:15





Was any explanation found for this behavior? I'm seeing the same things: I installed nvidia-docker on an Ubuntu 16.04 machine and restarting docker fixes the "Too many levels of symbolic links" problem.

– Randall Radmer
Feb 26 at 23:15










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0














How have you defined mount options for autofs on /etc/auto.master, are you doing direct or indirect automount?



Also did you autofs entirely within a Docker container with the --privileged option added to the docker run command? Using this approach you should be able to perform NFS mounts without any issues.



Please note that bind mounting an autofs mount into a container with an independent autofs daemon running can't be done because it may conflict with the autofs daemon running in the originating namespace.



For indirect mounts, running autofs in the root namespace provides automounting for Docker containers by binding the autofs top level mounts into containers with the Docker volume option should function mostly as expected.






share|improve this answer























    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "2"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f889273%2ftoo-many-levels-of-symbolic-links-in-nfs-via-automount-resolved-by-restarting%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    0














    How have you defined mount options for autofs on /etc/auto.master, are you doing direct or indirect automount?



    Also did you autofs entirely within a Docker container with the --privileged option added to the docker run command? Using this approach you should be able to perform NFS mounts without any issues.



    Please note that bind mounting an autofs mount into a container with an independent autofs daemon running can't be done because it may conflict with the autofs daemon running in the originating namespace.



    For indirect mounts, running autofs in the root namespace provides automounting for Docker containers by binding the autofs top level mounts into containers with the Docker volume option should function mostly as expected.






    share|improve this answer



























      0














      How have you defined mount options for autofs on /etc/auto.master, are you doing direct or indirect automount?



      Also did you autofs entirely within a Docker container with the --privileged option added to the docker run command? Using this approach you should be able to perform NFS mounts without any issues.



      Please note that bind mounting an autofs mount into a container with an independent autofs daemon running can't be done because it may conflict with the autofs daemon running in the originating namespace.



      For indirect mounts, running autofs in the root namespace provides automounting for Docker containers by binding the autofs top level mounts into containers with the Docker volume option should function mostly as expected.






      share|improve this answer

























        0












        0








        0







        How have you defined mount options for autofs on /etc/auto.master, are you doing direct or indirect automount?



        Also did you autofs entirely within a Docker container with the --privileged option added to the docker run command? Using this approach you should be able to perform NFS mounts without any issues.



        Please note that bind mounting an autofs mount into a container with an independent autofs daemon running can't be done because it may conflict with the autofs daemon running in the originating namespace.



        For indirect mounts, running autofs in the root namespace provides automounting for Docker containers by binding the autofs top level mounts into containers with the Docker volume option should function mostly as expected.






        share|improve this answer













        How have you defined mount options for autofs on /etc/auto.master, are you doing direct or indirect automount?



        Also did you autofs entirely within a Docker container with the --privileged option added to the docker run command? Using this approach you should be able to perform NFS mounts without any issues.



        Please note that bind mounting an autofs mount into a container with an independent autofs daemon running can't be done because it may conflict with the autofs daemon running in the originating namespace.



        For indirect mounts, running autofs in the root namespace provides automounting for Docker containers by binding the autofs top level mounts into containers with the Docker volume option should function mostly as expected.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered Dec 30 '17 at 17:11









        Mika WolfMika Wolf

        1413




        1413



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Server Fault!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fserverfault.com%2fquestions%2f889273%2ftoo-many-levels-of-symbolic-links-in-nfs-via-automount-resolved-by-restarting%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Wikipedia:Vital articles Мазмуну Biography - Өмүр баян Philosophy and psychology - Философия жана психология Religion - Дин Social sciences - Коомдук илимдер Language and literature - Тил жана адабият Science - Илим Technology - Технология Arts and recreation - Искусство жана эс алуу History and geography - Тарых жана география Навигация менюсу

            Bruxelas-Capital Índice Historia | Composición | Situación lingüística | Clima | Cidades irmandadas | Notas | Véxase tamén | Menú de navegacióneO uso das linguas en Bruxelas e a situación do neerlandés"Rexión de Bruxelas Capital"o orixinalSitio da rexiónPáxina de Bruselas no sitio da Oficina de Promoción Turística de Valonia e BruxelasMapa Interactivo da Rexión de Bruxelas-CapitaleeWorldCat332144929079854441105155190212ID28008674080552-90000 0001 0666 3698n94104302ID540940339365017018237

            What should I write in an apology letter, since I have decided not to join a company after accepting an offer letterShould I keep looking after accepting a job offer?What should I do when I've been verbally told I would get an offer letter, but still haven't gotten one after 4 weeks?Do I accept an offer from a company that I am not likely to join?New job hasn't confirmed starting date and I want to give current employer as much notice as possibleHow should I address my manager in my resignation letter?HR delayed background verification, now jobless as resignedNo email communication after accepting a formal written offer. How should I phrase the call?What should I do if after receiving a verbal offer letter I am informed that my written job offer is put on hold due to some internal issues?Should I inform the current employer that I am about to resign within 1-2 weeks since I have signed the offer letter and waiting for visa?What company will do, if I send their offer letter to another company