Re: [lustre-discuss] "tag" feature of ltop

2015-05-21 Thread Faaland, Olaf P. 
OK, thanks.

Olaf P. Faaland
LLNL

From: Alexander I Kulyavtsev [a...@fnal.gov]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 4:25 PM
To: Faaland, Olaf P.
Cc: Alexander I Kulyavtsev; lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] "tag" feature of ltop

As you said in earlier mail, when I sort by IO rate, locks, etc., selected OST 
are jumping around or just in different rows as seen below.

Anyway, this is not strong desire in the long term: I may feed cerebro output 
to the web page.

Best regards, Alex.

On May 21, 2015, at 5:42 PM, Faaland, Olaf P. 
mailto:faala...@llnl.gov>> wrote:

Alexander,

Thanks for your reply.

ltop also lets you sort by OSS, so that the OSTs sharing an OSS are all next to 
each other.  Do you find tagging more helpful than that?

Olaf P. Faaland
LLNL

From: Alexander I Kulyavtsev [a...@fnal.gov<mailto:a...@fnal.gov>]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 2:59 PM
To: Faaland, Olaf P.
Cc: Alexander I Kulyavtsev; 
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org<mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] "tag" feature of ltop

It may have sense to keep tagging.

I marked OSS dslustre15 and then switched to OST view.  I have all OSTs on 
marked OSS highlighted:

005c F dslustre13  10160 1 0 16503001   95   80
005d F dslustre14  10160 0 0 07472001   95   79
005e F dslustre13  10160 0 0 08880001   95   75
005f F dslustre14  10160 0 0 07161001   95   77
0060 F dslustre15  10160 0 0 0747800   48   96   76
0061 F dslustre16  10160 0 0 07543001   96   78
0062 F dslustre15  10160 0 0 0690700   48   96   78
0063 F dslustre16  10160 0 0 07410001   96   75
0064 F dslustre15  10160 0 0 0611300   48   96   80
0065 F dslustre16  10160 0 0 06833001   96   78
0066 F dslustre15  10160 1 0 1654500   48   96   78
0067 F dslustre16  10160 1 0 17190001   96   78

I was about to say 'we do not use it' yesterday; tracking some issue today.
Thanks, ALex.


On May 18, 2015, at 7:29 PM, Faaland, Olaf P. 
mailto:faala...@llnl.gov>> wrote:

Hello,

I am working on updating ltop, the text client within LMT 
(https://github.com/chaos/lmt/wiki).  I am adding support for DNE (multiple 
active MDT's within a single filesystem).

In the interesting of keeping the tool free of cruft, I am asking the community 
about their usage.

Currently, ltop allows for the user to "tag" an OST or an OSS, which causes the 
row(s) for that OSS (or OST's on that OSS) to be underlined so that they stand 
out visually.  Presumably this is so that one can follow an OST as it bounces 
around the table, when the table is sorted by something that changes 
dynamically like CPU usage or lock count.

Does anyone use this feature?  The first few people I polled do not use it, but 
if others use it I will extend it to the MDT's.  If no one uses it, then I'll 
remove it entirely.

Thanks,

Olaf P. Faaland
Livermore Computing
Lawrence Livermore National Lab
___
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org<mailto: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

Re: [lustre-discuss] "tag" feature of ltop

2015-05-21 Thread Alexander I Kulyavtsev 
As you said in earlier mail, when I sort by IO rate, locks, etc., selected OST 
are jumping around or just in different rows as seen below.

Anyway, this is not strong desire in the long term: I may feed cerebro output 
to the web page.

Best regards, Alex.

On May 21, 2015, at 5:42 PM, Faaland, Olaf P. 
mailto:faala...@llnl.gov>> wrote:

Alexander,

Thanks for your reply.

ltop also lets you sort by OSS, so that the OSTs sharing an OSS are all next to 
each other.  Do you find tagging more helpful than that?

Olaf P. Faaland
LLNL

From: Alexander I Kulyavtsev [a...@fnal.gov<mailto:a...@fnal.gov>]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 2:59 PM
To: Faaland, Olaf P.
Cc: Alexander I Kulyavtsev; 
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org<mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] "tag" feature of ltop

It may have sense to keep tagging.

I marked OSS dslustre15 and then switched to OST view.  I have all OSTs on 
marked OSS highlighted:

005c F dslustre13  10160 1 0 16503001   95   80
005d F dslustre14  10160 0 0 07472001   95   79
005e F dslustre13  10160 0 0 08880001   95   75
005f F dslustre14  10160 0 0 07161001   95   77
0060 F dslustre15  10160 0 0 0747800   48   96   76
0061 F dslustre16  10160 0 0 07543001   96   78
0062 F dslustre15  10160 0 0 0690700   48   96   78
0063 F dslustre16  10160 0 0 07410001   96   75
0064 F dslustre15  10160 0 0 0611300   48   96   80
0065 F dslustre16  10160 0 0 06833001   96   78
0066 F dslustre15  10160 1 0 1654500   48   96   78
0067 F dslustre16  10160 1 0 17190001   96   78

I was about to say 'we do not use it' yesterday; tracking some issue today.
Thanks, ALex.


On May 18, 2015, at 7:29 PM, Faaland, Olaf P. 
mailto:faala...@llnl.gov>> wrote:

Hello,

I am working on updating ltop, the text client within LMT 
(https://github.com/chaos/lmt/wiki).  I am adding support for DNE (multiple 
active MDT's within a single filesystem).

In the interesting of keeping the tool free of cruft, I am asking the community 
about their usage.

Currently, ltop allows for the user to "tag" an OST or an OSS, which causes the 
row(s) for that OSS (or OST's on that OSS) to be underlined so that they stand 
out visually.  Presumably this is so that one can follow an OST as it bounces 
around the table, when the table is sorted by something that changes 
dynamically like CPU usage or lock count.

Does anyone use this feature?  The first few people I polled do not use it, but 
if others use it I will extend it to the MDT's.  If no one uses it, then I'll 
remove it entirely.

Thanks,

Olaf P. Faaland
Livermore Computing
Lawrence Livermore National Lab
___
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org<mailto: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

Re: [lustre-discuss] "tag" feature of ltop

2015-05-21 Thread Faaland, Olaf P. 
Alexander,

Thanks for your reply.

ltop also lets you sort by OSS, so that the OSTs sharing an OSS are all next to 
each other.  Do you find tagging more helpful than that?

Olaf P. Faaland
LLNL

From: Alexander I Kulyavtsev [a...@fnal.gov]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2015 2:59 PM
To: Faaland, Olaf P.
Cc: Alexander I Kulyavtsev; lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] "tag" feature of ltop

It may have sense to keep tagging.

I marked OSS dslustre15 and then switched to OST view.  I have all OSTs on 
marked OSS highlighted:

005c F dslustre13  10160 1 0 16503001   95   80
005d F dslustre14  10160 0 0 07472001   95   79
005e F dslustre13  10160 0 0 08880001   95   75
005f F dslustre14  10160 0 0 07161001   95   77
0060 F dslustre15  10160 0 0 0747800   48   96   76
0061 F dslustre16  10160 0 0 07543001   96   78
0062 F dslustre15  10160 0 0 0690700   48   96   78
0063 F dslustre16  10160 0 0 07410001   96   75
0064 F dslustre15  10160 0 0 0611300   48   96   80
0065 F dslustre16  10160 0 0 06833001   96   78
0066 F dslustre15  10160 1 0 1654500   48   96   78
0067 F dslustre16  10160 1 0 17190001   96   78

I was about to say 'we do not use it' yesterday; tracking some issue today.
Thanks, ALex.


On May 18, 2015, at 7:29 PM, Faaland, Olaf P. 
mailto:faala...@llnl.gov>> wrote:

Hello,

I am working on updating ltop, the text client within LMT 
(https://github.com/chaos/lmt/wiki).  I am adding support for DNE (multiple 
active MDT's within a single filesystem).

In the interesting of keeping the tool free of cruft, I am asking the community 
about their usage.

Currently, ltop allows for the user to "tag" an OST or an OSS, which causes the 
row(s) for that OSS (or OST's on that OSS) to be underlined so that they stand 
out visually.  Presumably this is so that one can follow an OST as it bounces 
around the table, when the table is sorted by something that changes 
dynamically like CPU usage or lock count.

Does anyone use this feature?  The first few people I polled do not use it, but 
if others use it I will extend it to the MDT's.  If no one uses it, then I'll 
remove it entirely.

Thanks,

Olaf P. Faaland
Livermore Computing
Lawrence Livermore National Lab
___
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org<mailto: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

Re: [lustre-discuss] "tag" feature of ltop

2015-05-21 Thread Alexander I Kulyavtsev 
It may have sense to keep tagging.

I marked OSS dslustre15 and then switched to OST view.  I have all OSTs on 
marked OSS highlighted:

005c F dslustre13  10160 1 0 16503001   95   80
005d F dslustre14  10160 0 0 07472001   95   79
005e F dslustre13  10160 0 0 08880001   95   75
005f F dslustre14  10160 0 0 07161001   95   77
0060 F dslustre15  10160 0 0 0747800   48   96   76
0061 F dslustre16  10160 0 0 07543001   96   78
0062 F dslustre15  10160 0 0 0690700   48   96   78
0063 F dslustre16  10160 0 0 07410001   96   75
0064 F dslustre15  10160 0 0 0611300   48   96   80
0065 F dslustre16  10160 0 0 06833001   96   78
0066 F dslustre15  10160 1 0 1654500   48   96   78
0067 F dslustre16  10160 1 0 17190001   96   78

I was about to say 'we do not use it' yesterday; tracking some issue today.
Thanks, ALex.


On May 18, 2015, at 7:29 PM, Faaland, Olaf P. 
mailto:faala...@llnl.gov>> wrote:

Hello,

I am working on updating ltop, the text client within LMT 
(https://github.com/chaos/lmt/wiki).  I am adding support for DNE (multiple 
active MDT's within a single filesystem).

In the interesting of keeping the tool free of cruft, I am asking the community 
about their usage.

Currently, ltop allows for the user to "tag" an OST or an OSS, which causes the 
row(s) for that OSS (or OST's on that OSS) to be underlined so that they stand 
out visually.  Presumably this is so that one can follow an OST as it bounces 
around the table, when the table is sorted by something that changes 
dynamically like CPU usage or lock count.

Does anyone use this feature?  The first few people I polled do not use it, but 
if others use it I will extend it to the MDT's.  If no one uses it, then I'll 
remove it entirely.

Thanks,

Olaf P. Faaland
Livermore Computing
Lawrence Livermore National Lab
___
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] "tag" feature of ltop

2015-05-18 Thread Faaland, Olaf P. 
Hello,

I am working on updating ltop, the text client within LMT 
(https://github.com/chaos/lmt/wiki).  I am adding support for DNE (multiple 
active MDT's within a single filesystem).

In the interesting of keeping the tool free of cruft, I am asking the community 
about their usage.

Currently, ltop allows for the user to "tag" an OST or an OSS, which causes the 
row(s) for that OSS (or OST's on that OSS) to be underlined so that they stand 
out visually.  Presumably this is so that one can follow an OST as it bounces 
around the table, when the table is sorted by something that changes 
dynamically like CPU usage or lock count.

Does anyone use this feature?  The first few people I polled do not use it, but 
if others use it I will extend it to the MDT's.  If no one uses it, then I'll 
remove it entirely.

Thanks,

Olaf P. Faaland
Livermore Computing
Lawrence Livermore National Lab
___
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org