Hi all,About main differences between GPFS and Lustre, here you have some bits from our experience:
-Reliability: GPFS its been proved to be more stable and reliable. Also offers more flexibility in terms of fail-over. It have no restriction in number of servers. As far as I know, an NSD can have as many secondary servers as you want (we are using 8).
-Metadata: In Lustre each file system is restricted to two servers. No restriction in GPFS.
-Updates: In GPFS you can update the whole storage cluster without stopping production, one server at a time.
-Server/Client role: As Jeremy said, in GPFS every server act as a client as well. Useful for administrative tasks.
-Troubleshooting: Problems with GPFS are easier to track down. Logs are more clear, and offers better tools than Lustre.
-Support: No problems at all with GPFS support. It is true that it could take time to go up within all support levels, but we always got a good solution. Quite different in terms of hardware. IBM support quality has drop a lot since about last year an a half. Really slow and tedious process to get replacements. Moreover, we keep receiving bad "certified reutilitzed parts" hardware, which slow the whole process even more.
These are the main differences I would stand out after some years of experience with both file systems, but do not take it as a fact.
PD: Salvatore, I would suggest you to contact Jordi Valls. He joined EBI a couple of months ago, and has experience working with both file systems here at BSC.
Best Regards, Sergi. On 08/08/2014 01:40 PM, Jeremy Robst wrote:
On Fri, 8 Aug 2014, Salvatore Di Nardo wrote:Now, skipping all this GSS rant, which have nothing to do with the file system anyway and going back to my question: Could someone point the main differences between GPFS and Lustre?I'm looking at making the same decision here - to buy GPFS or to roll our own Lustre configuration. I'm in the process of setting up test systems, and so far the main difference seems to be in the that in GPFS each server sees the full filesystem, and so you can run other applications (e.g backup) on a GPFS server whereas the Luste OSS (object storage servers) see only a portion of the storage (the filesystem is striped across the OSSes), so you need a Lustre client to mount the full filesystem for things like backup. However I have very little practical experience of either and would also be interested in any comments. Thanks Jeremy _______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sergi More Codina
Barcelona Supercomputing Center
Centro Nacional de Supercomputacion
WWW: http://www.bsc.es Tel: +34-93-405 42 27
e-mail: [email protected] Fax: +34-93-413 77 21
------------------------------------------------------------------------
WARNING / LEGAL TEXT: This message is intended only for the use of the
individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
information which is privileged, confidential, proprietary, or exempt
from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended
recipient or the person responsible for delivering the message to the
intended recipient, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing,
distributing, copying, or in any way using this message. If you have
received this communication in error, please notify the sender and
destroy and delete any copies you may have received.
http://www.bsc.es/disclaimer.htm
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at gpfsug.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
