On 30/12/2019 16:20, Marc A Kaplan wrote: > Now apart from the mechanics of handling and manipulating pathnames ... > > the idea to manage storage by "mv"ing instead of MIGRATEing (GPFS-wise) > may be ill-advised. > > I suspect this is a hold-over or leftover from the old days -- when a > filesystem was comprised of just a few storage devices (disk drives) and > the only way available to manage space was to mv files to another > filesystem or archive to tape or whatnot.. >
I suspect based on the OP is from (a cancer research institute which is basically life sciences) that this is an incorrect assumption. I would guess this is about "archiving" results coming off experimental equipment. I use the term "archiving" in the same way that various email programs try and "archive" my old emails. That is to prevent the output directory of the equipment filling up with many thousands of files and/or directories I want to automate the placement in a directory hierarchy of old results. Imagine a piece of equipment that does 50 different analysis's a day every working day. That's a 1000 a month or ~50,000 a year. It's about logically moving stuff to keep ones working directory manageable but making finding an old analysis easy to find. I would also note that some experimental equipment would do many more than 50 different analysis's a day. It's a common requirement in any sort of research facility, especially when they have central facilities for doing analysis on equipment that would be too expensive for an individual group or where it makes sense to "outsource" repetitive basics analysis to lower paid staff. JAB. -- Jonathan A. Buzzard Tel: +44141-5483420 HPC System Administrator, ARCHIE-WeSt. University of Strathclyde, John Anderson Building, Glasgow. G4 0NG _______________________________________________ gpfsug-discuss mailing list gpfsug-discuss at spectrumscale.org http://gpfsug.org/mailman/listinfo/gpfsug-discuss
