Yes, you can run ZFS instead of ldiskfs. A number of sites, LLNL and SDSC included, have moved over to ZFS only Lustre file systems. There have been a number of presentations given at the Lustre User Group (LUG) about the advantages of ZFS. Please look here http://opensfs.org/resources/presentations/ and look at the past few years of talks with ZFS in the title.
I will be giving a tutorial on how to Install and Configure a ZFS file system at the Lustre Ecosystem Workshop in March, but that may be a bit too late depending on your needs. -Marc ---- D. Marc Stearman Lustre Operations Lead [email protected] Office: 925-423-9670 Mobile: 925-216-7516 > On Jan 27, 2016, at 2:00 AM, [email protected] wrote: > > Hi, > > Now, it cleared my confusion. So, we really should go for having storage as > separate, we will fix with this option. > > And besides, I have completely ignored ZFS till now. Can I go for ZFS instead > of ldiskfs? What’s the main difference I can find? > > -- > Regards, > Jeevan. > > From: lustre-discuss [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Oliver Mangold > Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2016 3:25 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] How to configure OST and OSS on separate nodes > > On 27.01.2016 10:36, [email protected] wrote: > But my question is: Can I use OST on client and OSS on separate server (if it > is possible to run OST and OSS on separate servers) > > I don't understand what you mean. OSS is just a name for the machine which > runs one or multiple OSTs. So by definition OSTs always run on OSSes. > > The reason for this is we have tens of servers with internal hard disk of 4T > each which we want to use it for OSTs, but all these servers are also should > be clients (they are the grid execution hosts). > Sounds like a bad idea to me to do that. Beside the mentioned memory pressure > problems, you also don't have a failover configuration for the OSTs, which is > strongly recommended. Otherwise one downed server will stall all or most of > your active jobs. > > So, I am thinking of having separate OSSs and use the servers itself as OSTs. > Also, do we need to install lustre kernel in all those OSTs? Because, all > these servers are running with kernel 2.6.32-573.12.1.el6.x86_64, which the > standard lustre packages won’t be supporting. So, we need to roll back to > 32-504_lustre kernel and again we need to work on setting yum repos, > installing packages, resolving dependencies required for our tools..it’s > really a lot of work. > > The last I know is, you need a patched kernel when using ldiskfs as the > backing filesystem, but you can use a patchless kernel with ZFS. > > > The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to > this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may > contain proprietary, confidential or privileged information. If you are not > the intended recipient, you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this > e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately and destroy all copies of this > message and any attachments. WARNING: Computer viruses can be transmitted via > email. The recipient should check this email and any attachments for the > presence of viruses. The company accepts no liability for any damage caused > by any virus transmitted by this email. > www.wipro.com_______________________________________________ > lustre-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org _______________________________________________ lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
