We are evaluating Lustre with the same intent - to use it as a general purpose file system. Lustre seems to perform well (compared to NFS) with, - large number of clients - relatively bigger file sizes (roughly above 512KB) - dedicated storage servers hosting OSTs But its performance doesn't measure up with, - small files sizes (the ones you typically find in /usr/bin, /etc, ...) - handful of clients - general purpose PCs hosting OSTs along with other applications Atleast this is our understanding trying out Lustre for the past couple of weeks. Other than that it is pretty straight forward to configure/install and its code is quite well written. I wish it had better performance for small files. Here are few more email threads on this subject,
https://mail.clusterfs.com/pipermail/lustre-discuss/2006-June/001619.htm l https://mail.clusterfs.com/pipermail/lustre-discuss/2005-December/001036 .html thanks, Sridhar ________________________________ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Atul Vidwansa Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 9:05 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [Lustre-discuss] Lustre as general purpose cluster filesystem I wanted to know if Lustre can be used as a general purpose cluster filesystem? Has anybody done any benchmarking of Lustre with workload like fileserver(postmark), varmail, oltp etc? My intention is to use lustre for scalable web services (mostly read only data), to serve files (postmark kind of load) and try to run Oracle RAC instances on 4-8 Lustre clients. As far as I know Lustre has been used mostly for HPC environment for scientific calculations, what about standard industry applications like scalable apache, Oracle RAC etc? Regards, -Atul _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
