Yes, there is intention to add it to lfs find. Whether or not it should disqualify results is up to you at I/O 500 - it seems like if most users would think it acceptable for find most of the time (and it should be), then it should probably be allowed. But at the same time, its (theoretical - couldn’t today) use for mdtest would very much be “writing to the benchmark” and defeating the intent.
________________________________ From: John Bent <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 11:54:32 PM To: Patrick Farrell Cc: Abe Asraoui; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [lustre-devel] MDT test in rel2.11 Thanks Patrick. That's interesting. However, the exact motivation why IO500 has the 'find' command is this same intended use case; stale results therefore actually present an interesting dilemma to IO500. They are not POSIX compliant but that loss of compliance shouldn't necessarily disqualify this result... On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 12:49 AM, Patrick Farrell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Lazy SoM is not landed yet, and it won’t be improving benchmark scores - it’s never “known 100% correct”, so it can’t be used for actual POSIX ops - if a file size read out is used for a write offset, then you’ve got data corruption. So for now it’s strictly limited to tools that know about it (accessed via an ioctl) and can accept information that may be stale. The intended use case is scanning the FS for policy application. ________________________________ From: John Bent <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 10:55:24 PM To: Patrick Farrell Cc: Abe Asraoui; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [lustre-devel] MDT test in rel2.11 I'm curious about how DOM improves IO500 scores. :) Also LSOM but I don't know actually whether that's in 2.11 or where. On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 11:33 PM, Patrick Farrell <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Abe, Any benchmarking would be highly dependent on hardware, both client and server. Is there a particular comparison (say, between versions) you’re interested in or something you’re concerned about? - Patrick ________________________________ From: lustre-devel <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Abe Asraoui <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 9:23:10 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; Abe Asraoui Subject: [lustre-devel] MDT test in rel2.11 Hi All, Has anyone done any MDT testing under the latest rel2.11 and have benchmark data to share? Thanks, Abe _______________________________________________ lustre-devel mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-devel-lustre.org _______________________________________________ lustre-devel mailing list [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-devel-lustre.org
_______________________________________________ lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
