On Fri, 2008-06-06 at 17:47 +0200, Enrico Morelli wrote: > On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 11:24:28 -0400 > "Brian J. Murrell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So, about 48MiB/s, yes? What does your storage backend look like? > > The server is connected to an MSA60 with 7x500GB SATA HDD in RAID 6.
Have you measured the throughput of the device(s) you are using as OST(s) on the OSS(es)? You also reported that your network is capable of 30MB/s. That already doesn't seem right since you are getting 48MiB/s of throughput. > Sorry, sorry, sorry, I'm very tired. I connected directly to the NFS > server :-(((( On a client machine the time is more than 1 minutes. So Lustre is 3x faster than NFS? Are you happy with your 48MiB/s from your Lustre filesystem? > The problem is that a lot of people Which people? > told me that 'ls' required a lot of > time, a 'cp' required a lot of time, all operations on lustre > filesystem are very slow. So you want faster than 48MiB/s? You need to have the hardware capable of delivering that. If you want better than 48MiB/s (and certainly you can get way, way higher with the right hardware) you first need to determine what your hardware is capable of. You need to benchmark your OSTs and then benchmark your network. Only when you know what the components are capable of can you determine what the aggregation of them should be able to deliver. > The people that works on lustre has a lot of > files to manage, so testing his directories I found that an 'ls' require > a lot of time and the same for 'cp' and 'rm' operations. > > The dd was not a better test to do. Sorry again. Yeah. For throughput, use a real benchmark like IOR, iozone, etc. While that will be a good example of what cp will do, it is not a good example to compare 'ls' to as 'ls' is a metadata heavy application, not file i/o heavy. b.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
