Hi, in that case I'd open several tar pipes in parallel, maybe using directories carefully selected, like
tar -c <source_dir> | ssh <target_host> "tar -x" I am not quite sure whether "-C /" for tar works here ("tar -C / -x"), but along these lines might be a good efficient method. target_hosts should be all nodes haveing the target file system mounted, and you should start those pipes on the nodes with the source file system. It is best to start with the largest directories, and use some masterscript to start the tar pipes controlled by semaphores to not overload anything. Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards Dr. Uwe Falke IT Specialist High Performance Computing Services / Integrated Technology Services / Data Center Services ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IBM Deutschland Rathausstr. 7 09111 Chemnitz Phone: +49 371 6978 2165 Mobile: +49 175 575 2877 E-Mail: uwefa...@de.ibm.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- IBM Deutschland Business & Technology Services GmbH / Geschäftsführung: Thomas Wolter, Sven Schooß Sitz der Gesellschaft: Ehningen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 17122 From: "Oesterlin, Robert" <robert.oester...@nuance.com> To: gpfsug main discussion list <gpfsug-discuss@spectrumscale.org> Date: 06/03/2019 13:44 Subject: [gpfsug-discuss] Follow-up: migrating billions of files Sent by: gpfsug-discuss-boun...@spectrumscale.org Some of you had questions to my original post. More information: Source: - Files are straight GPFS/Posix - no extended NFSV4 ACLs - A solution that requires $?s to be spent on software (ie, Aspera) isn?t a very viable option - Both source and target clusters are in the same DC - Source is stand-alone NSD servers (bonded 10g-E) and 8gb FC SAN storage - Approx 40 file systems, a few large ones with 300M-400M files each, others smaller - no independent file sets - migration must pose minimal disruption to existing users Target architecture is a small number of file systems (2-3) on ESS with independent filesets - Target (ESS) will have multiple 40gb-E links on each NSD server (GS4) My current thinking is AFM with a pre-populate of the file space and switch the clients over to have them pull data they need (most of the data is older and less active) and them let AFM populate the rest in the background. Bob Oesterlin Sr Principal Storage Engineer, Nuance _______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__gpfsug.org_mailman_listinfo_gpfsug-2Ddiscuss&d=DwICAg&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=fTuVGtgq6A14KiNeaGfNZzOOgtHW5Lm4crZU6lJxtB8&m=J5RpIj-EzFyU_dM9I4P8SrpHMikte_pn9sbllFcOvyM&s=fEwDQyDSL7hvOVPbg_n8o_LDz-cLqSI6lQtSzmhaSoI&e= _______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss