Is there a reason clustered metadata must be ZFS only? Kevin
On Thu, 2007-09-27 at 14:09 -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote: > On Sep 27, 2007 16:10 +0200, Niklas Edmundsson wrote: > > On Thu, 27 Sep 2007, Andreas Dilger wrote: > > >On Sep 27, 2007 10:53 +0200, Niklas Edmundsson wrote: > > >>We have 13701222 files in one directory, and creating more files there > > >>fails even though we have lots of free inodes in the filesystem. > > > > > >We generally only test up to 10M files in a single directory. If you had > > >a perfect hash distribution you might be able to get to 25M files in the > > >directory. > > > > I suspected something like that. The error message needs some help > > though, I'd prefer having the directory in question in there if > > possible, or at least some hint on where to look. > > > > >>On MDS we get this in the kernel log: > > >>[692361.061558] LDISKFS-fs warning (device sdb2): ldiskfs_dx_add_entry: > > >>Directory index full! > > > > > >This is one of the reasons we are moving to ZFS for the back-end storage. > > > > Any idea on the timeframe? > > The 1.8 release (planned Q1 2008) will allow new filesystems to be created > with ZFS OSTs and MDTs. We will require ZFS for clustered MDTs in 2.0 > (and possibly all backing stores, though it should of course be possible > to still use 1.8 OSTs if required). > > Cheers, Andreas > -- > Andreas Dilger > Principal Software Engineer > Cluster File Systems, Inc. > > _______________________________________________ > Lustre-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
