Itβs LU-9574.
Jinshan
On May 30, 2017, at 12:24 PM, Jones, Peter A
> wrote:
Darby
Can you please open a JIRA ticket with this information?
Thanks
Peter
On 5/30/17, 12:10 PM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Vicker, Darby (JSC-EG311)"
Darby
Can you please open a JIRA ticket with this information?
Thanks
Peter
On 5/30/17, 12:10 PM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Vicker, Darby (JSC-EG311)"
on behalf of
Using the git bisect we were able to isolate the problem to this commit:
commit d8467ab8a2ca15fbbd5be3429c9cf9ceb0fa78b8
LU-7990 clio: revise readahead to support 16MB IO
In our testing, we can read from a large file (stripe count=4) at near line
rate (10 GbE β so 1200 MB/s) using a client
>> I tried a 2.8 client mounting the 2.9 servers and that showed the expected
>> behavior ??? increasing
>> performance with increasing OST's. Two things:
>>
>> 1. Any pointers to compiling a 2.8 client on recent RHEL 7 kernels would be
>> helpful. I had to boot
>> into an older kernel
Hi!
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 04:04:00PM +, Vicker, Darby (JSC-EG311) wrote:
> I tried a 2.8 client mounting the 2.9 servers and that showed the expected
> behavior ??? increasing performance with increasing OST's. Two things:
>
> 1. Any pointers to compiling a 2.8 client on recent RHEL 7
sa.gov>
Cc: "lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org" <lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] Large file read performance degradation from
multiple OST's
On May 24, 2017, at 10:04, Vicker, Darby (JSC-EG311) <darby.vicke...@nasa.gov>
wrote:
>
On May 24, 2017, at 10:04, Vicker, Darby (JSC-EG311)
wrote:
>
> I tried a 2.8 client mounting the 2.9 servers and that showed the expected
> behavior β increasing performance with increasing OST's. Two things:
>
> 1. Any pointers to compiling a 2.8 client on recent
I tried a 2.8 client mounting the 2.9 servers and that showed the expected
behavior β increasing performance with increasing OST's. Two things:
1. Any pointers to compiling a 2.8 client on recent RHEL 7 kernels would be
helpful. I had to boot into an older kernel to get the above test done.
Hello,
We recently noticed that the large file read performance on our 2.9 LFS is
dramatically worse than it used to be. The attached plot is the result of a
test script that uses dd to write a large file (50GB) to disk, read that file
and then copy it to a 2nd file to test write, read and