Slightly left-field question for MDTs, will we enable data on inode for
really tiny files in ldiskfs?

-Ben

On 2/22/18, 2:02 PM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Dilger, Andreas"
<lustre-discuss-boun...@lists.lustre.org on behalf of
andreas.dil...@intel.com> wrote:

>On Feb 6, 2018, at 10:32, E.S. Rosenberg <esr+lus...@mail.hebrew.edu>
>wrote:
>> 
>> Hello fellow Lustre users :)
>> 
>> Since I didn't want to take the "size of MDT, inode count, inode size"
>>thread too far off-topic I'm starting a new thread.
>> 
>> I'm curious how many people are using SSD MDTs?
>> Also how practical is such a thing in a 2.11.x Data On MDT scenario?
>> Is using some type of mix between HDD and SSD storage for MDTs
>>practical?
>> Does SSD vs HDD have an effect as far as ldiskfs vs zfs?
>
>It is worthwhile to mention that using DoM is going to be a lot easier
>with ZFS in a "fluid" usage environment than it will be with ldiskfs.
>The ZFS MDTs do not have pre-allocated inode/data separation, so enabling
>DoM will just mean you can put fewer inodes on the MDT if you put more
>data there.  With ldiskfs you have to decide this ratio at format time.
>The drawback is that ZFS is somewhat slower for metadata than ldiskfs,
>though it has improved in 2.10 significantly.
>
>Cheers, Andreas
>--
>Andreas Dilger
>Lustre Principal Architect
>Intel Corporation
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>lustre-discuss mailing list
>lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
>http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org

_______________________________________________
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org

Reply via email to