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?


> -----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
> >