Hi Fabrizio, There's no other errors in the xroot log. The server does not appear heavy, though there may well be congestion at the switch level at the moment. The servers are still running a quite (read very) old version of the xrootd server software but the client I tried first was one from March this year but then I switched to the same release as the server incase the cause was a protocol mismatch. Could the timeouts be on the server side if it's running an old version? Thanks, Chris. > -----Original Message----- > From: Fabrizio Furano [mailto:[log in to unmask]] > Sent: 19 October 2007 16:32 > To: Brew, CAJ (Chris) > Cc: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Failed xrdcp writes > > Hi Chris, > > Return code 11 means that the client was not able to write a chunk, > after having retried for several times if it was a timeout or network > problem, or after having received an explicit error from the server. > > Even if you have the server log at a low level, you should > be able to > spot if there are complaints before that line that you quoted (which > states that xrdcp gave up) > > If not, then the cause might be a temporary network trouble > (but quite > long) or a heavy overload on the server side disks. I > remember also that > XrdClient, and hence xrdcp, long time ago (about 1 year) had much > shorter timeouts, and hence was more prone to this kind of > troubles. Are > you using a reasonably recent version of it? > > Fabrizio > > Brew, CAJ (Chris) wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm experimenting with using xrdcp for the babar skiiming at RAL but > > some of the writes to the xrootd server fail. > > > > The only clue in the client logs I can find is: > > > > xrdcp failed with exit code 11 > > > > though there may be more being eaten by the wrappers. > > > > On the server side I see: > > > > XrdLink: Unable to receive from > babar004.1969:[log in to unmask]; > > connection reset by peer > > > > This doesn't happen for all transfer but a significant minority fail > > this way. > > > > Any ideas where I should be looking for the problem? > > > > Thanks, > > Chris > > >