The plan, like you say, is to add a new configuration file option that specifies the path to the metadata storage directory. We are going to keep the same directory layout as before; it's just that all of the BerkeleyDB files will go in the metadata tree while all of the bstream files go in the data tree. Seems simple enough.
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 10:16 AM, Sam Lang <[email protected]> wrote: > > Yes with metadata and data in the same server process, the same storage > space (and databases) are used for storing metadata objects and data > objects. The advantages of using the same databases in the same process are > from coalescing and grouping of operations together. That only happens when > both metadata and I/O workloads occur together on the file system. > > Splitting the metadata and data really just boils down to putting the > bstreams in a separate path, specified probably in the config file. What > are your plans there? > > -sam > > On May 29, 2009, at 11:06 AM, Nicholas Mills wrote: > > Sumit - > You're correct. Running two servers on the same node (one for data, one for > metadata) was the first thing we tried. In the end we decided it would be > better just to go ahead and add this functionality directly to Trove. I'm > not sure how significant the performance hit would be from running two > servers. > > --Nick > > On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 9:52 AM, Sumit Narayan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> This is pretty interesting. >> >> I am just curious, can't this be done by running two servers on the >> same node and treating one as metadata server and other as I/O server >> - each having their own data space. It might add just a little extra >> load on the node. I am guessing PVFS takes some advantage of putting >> metadata and data on same node. Can someone fill me in as to what they >> are. >> >> Thanks, >> Sumit. >> >> >> >> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Sam Lang <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > Hi David, >> > >> > I don't see any problems with putting that in future releases once its >> > ready. It would be great if you could update the developers list with >> your >> > planned changes, and possibly send along patches as you have them, >> allowing >> > everyone to provide input, etc. >> > >> > -sam >> > >> > On May 28, 2009, at 5:10 PM, David Bonnie wrote: >> > >> >> Everyone - >> >> >> >> Nick and I are working at LANL this summer and one of our projects >> >> involves modifying PVFS2 to use separate storage paths for metadata >> versus >> >> file data on a single PVFS2 server. The goal is to be able to place >> the >> >> metadata database files on faster drives (SSDs, RAM drives, etc) to >> speed up >> >> metadata operations while still being able to service data requests >> from a >> >> standard HDD. Does anyone forsee a problem with this being pushed into >> the >> >> main distribution once it is finished? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> - Dave >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Pvfs2-developers mailing list >> >> [email protected] >> >> http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Pvfs2-developers mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pvfs2-developers mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers >> > > >
_______________________________________________ Pvfs2-developers mailing list [email protected] http://www.beowulf-underground.org/mailman/listinfo/pvfs2-developers
