In the message dated: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 20:56:25 +,
The pithy ruminations from Luis Bolinches on
were:
=> Its been around in certain cases, some kernel <-> storage combination get
=> hit some not
=>
=> Scott referenced it here https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/community/wikis
=>
I always suspend the disk then use mmrestripefs -m to remove the data. Then
delete the disk with mmdeldisk.
‐m
Migrates all critical data off of any suspended
disk in this file system. Critical data is all
data that would be lost if
Hi Bob,
If you mean #4 with 2x data replication...then I would be very wary as the
chance of data loss would be very high given local disk failure rates. So
I think its really #4 with 3x replication vs #3 with 2x replication (and
raid5/6 in node) (with maybe 3x for metadata). The space overhead
Yep, I should have added those requirements :-)
1) Yes I care about the data. It’s not scratch but a permanent repository of
older, less frequently accessed data.
2) Yes, it will be backed up
3) I expect it to grow over time
4) Data integrity requirement: high
Bob Oesterlin
Sr Principal Storage
Just because I don’t think I’ve seen you state it: (How much) Do you care
about the data?
Is it scratch? Is it test data that exists elsewhere? Does it ever flow from
this storage to any other storage? Will it be dubbed business critical two
years after they swear to you that it’s not
Some interesting discussion here. Perhaps I should have been a bit clearer on
what I’m looking at here:
I have 12 servers with 70*4TB drives each – so the hardware is free. What’s the
best strategy for using these as GPFS NSD servers, given that I don’t want to
relay on any “bleeding edge”
