Hello, actually, I have a different opinion to what the conclusion of this thread seems to be since I believe that Lustre is no bad choice for /home. We are using Lustre as /home since 2005 and had no bad experiences with it. The reason why we use Lustre for /home and for /scratch is that we do not want to support different file system and hardware solutions.
Of course, the best solution always depends on your applications and your requirements. But we have 1000s of active users on more than 2500 nodes and they are using all kinds of applications. However, we also regularly educate our users to do the right thing, e.g. use other Lustre file systems, use local disks or fix their applications. BTW, Lustre jobstats are great for identifying misbehaving users. As mentioned, a good backup is important for /home for every kind of file system solution. With more than 100 million files more than 100 TB capacity doing disaster recovery in time is challenging. I've presented our solution for this at LAD'14, see https://www.eofs.eu/_media/events/lad14/06_roland_laifer_kit_lad14_20140922.pdf And we really needed it last year which was presented at the HPC-IODC, see https://wr.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/_media/events/2017/iodc-17-laifer.pdf Regards, Roland Am 16.02.2018 um 17:10 schrieb Carlson, Timothy S: > I'll just add +1 to this thread. /home on NFS for software builds, small > files, lots of metadata operations. Lustre for the rest. Users will do the > wrong thing even after education. > > Tim > > -----Original Message----- > From: lustre-discuss [mailto:lustre-discuss-boun...@lists.lustre.org] On > Behalf Of Steve Barnet > Sent: Friday, February 16, 2018 7:21 AM > To: lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org > Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] Lustre as /home directory > > On 2/16/18 8:53 AM, Michael Watters wrote: >> Can't be much worse than NFS. > > > Oh yes, it can! It will really depend upon how your users work with it. If > you regularly have many people building their software chains, that can drag > your interactive response to its knees very quickly. > If your users also like a to drop many thousands of small files into just a > few directories, you will definitely notice that as well. > > We have found that NFS (while it certainly will also > suffer) generally holds up better than Lustre in those use cases. No > particularly earth shattering news there. > > We have generally kept /home on NFS, and have fairly restrictive quotas > there. The idea is that /home is used for software builds and final results, > but that the heavy cluster processing workloads are handled by lustre. > > This has worked out OK. We still run into plenty of cases where people do the > wrong thing, but we can generally redirect them to the right place. > > Best, > > ---Steve > > > >> >> >> On 02/15/2018 10:30 AM, Mark Hahn wrote: >>>> My question is, Is it advisable to have /home in Lustre since users >>>> data will be of small files (less than 5MB)? >>> >>> certainly it works, but is not very pleasant for metadata-intensive >>> activity, such as compiling. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > _______________________________________________ lustre-discuss mailing list lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
