If the intention is not size, but to spread your I/Os on as many spindles as possible, you could still have these volume groups. Once you create these volumes, you could have them sliced into multiple LUNs where their collective sizes are acceptable by EXT3.
Regards -Peter From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Aaron Knister Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 7:30 PM To: Andreas Dilger Cc: [email protected]; Lundgren, Andrew Subject: Re: [Lustre-discuss] Hardware Question So if I have arrays with 15 drives in them should I just configure two smaller arrays? Also if I make a giant 30 terabyte filesystem of underlying say 6TB disk arrays and one of my disk arrays bites the dust what happens to the rest of the filesystem and how easy is it to recover from this situation? -Aaron On Oct 10, 2007, at 11:48 AM, Andreas Dilger wrote: On Oct 10, 2007 09:40 -0600, Lundgren, Andrew wrote: As RH 5.1 will support 16TB ext3 partitions, will lustre inherit that functionality? We haven't looked at this yet. The ldiskfs code is ext3 + patches, so there is some chance that it will work (more likely on 64-bit platforms), but we haven't audited the ldiskfs patches to check if they are 32-bit clean. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andreas Dilger Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2007 9:26 AM To: Aaron Knister Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Lustre-discuss] Hardware Question On Oct 06, 2007 10:28 -0400, Aaron Knister wrote: Oh, right I forgot about that. Well...if i had an 8tb lun and split it into 2 volume groups using LVM do you think the performance would be worse than making 2 raids at the hardware level? Well, it won't be doing the disks any favours, since you'll now have contention between the OSTs, and the kernel will be doing a poor job with the IO elevator decisions. I would suggest making 2 smaller RAID LUNs instead. In the end it is up to you to decide if the IO performance is acceptable. You can do some testing using lustre-iokit to see what the component device performance is. On Oct 5, 2007, at 6:18 PM, Andreas Dilger wrote: On Oct 05, 2007 13:14 -0400, Aaron Knister wrote: Make that 6x 9.7TB luns. Lustre (== ext3) doesn't support >= 8TB LUNs. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger Principal Software Engineer Cluster File Systems, Inc. Aaron Knister Associate Systems Administrator/Web Designer Center for Research on Environment and Water (301) 595-7001 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
