Re: [lustre-discuss] What does your (next) MDT look like?

[Dilger, Andreas]

I definitely think this would be interesting.  It needs some testing, and very 
likely a bit of work to get inline_data to work together with Lustre, but it 
makes sense now that DoM is available.  With the change to 1KB inode size in 
ldiskfs MDTs, this should allow files up to about 700 bytes to be stored inside 
the inode (or larger if the inode size was increased).

Cheers, Andreas

> On Feb 23, 2018, at 07:58, Ben Evans  wrote:
> 
> Slightly left-field question for MDTs, will we enable data on inode for
> really tiny files in ldiskfs?
> 
> -Ben
> 
> On 2/22/18, 2:02 PM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Dilger, Andreas"
>  andreas.dil...@intel.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Feb 6, 2018, at 10:32, E.S. Rosenberg 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello fellow Lustre users :)
>>> 
>>> Since I didn't want to take the "size of MDT, inode count, inode size"
>>> thread too far off-topic I'm starting a new thread.
>>> 
>>> I'm curious how many people are using SSD MDTs?
>>> Also how practical is such a thing in a 2.11.x Data On MDT scenario?
>>> Is using some type of mix between HDD and SSD storage for MDTs
>>> practical?
>>> Does SSD vs HDD have an effect as far as ldiskfs vs zfs?
>> 
>> It is worthwhile to mention that using DoM is going to be a lot easier
>> with ZFS in a "fluid" usage environment than it will be with ldiskfs.
>> The ZFS MDTs do not have pre-allocated inode/data separation, so enabling
>> DoM will just mean you can put fewer inodes on the MDT if you put more
>> data there.  With ldiskfs you have to decide this ratio at format time.
>> The drawback is that ZFS is somewhat slower for metadata than ldiskfs,
>> though it has improved in 2.10 significantly.
>> 
>> Cheers, Andreas
>> --
>> Andreas Dilger
>> Lustre Principal Architect
>> Intel Corporation
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> lustre-discuss mailing list
>> lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
>> http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
> 

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Lustre Principal Architect
Intel Corporation







___
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org

Re: [lustre-discuss] Level 3 support

[John Bent]

DDN offers L3. :)

> On Feb 23, 2018, at 10:18 AM, Jeff Johnson  
> wrote:
> 
> Media malpractice. Intel still has it's level 3+ Lustre support function. The 
> media reporting of Intel's org changes was poor at best. Some of the more 
> inexperienced vendors may have lost touch with HPDD, my opinion.
> 
> --Jeff
> 
>> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 8:30 AM, Brian Andrus  wrote:
>> With the relatively recent changes in Lustre support out there, I am curious 
>> as to what folks have started doing/planning for level 3 support.
>> 
>> I know a few vendors that sell lustre based products but only provide first 
>> or second levels of support. They used to use Intel for 3rd level, which we 
>> had used in the past as well. But now they no longer offer it, so they are 
>> in a possible pickle if anything goes terribly south.
>> 
>> 
>> Brian Andrus
>> 
>> ___
>> lustre-discuss mailing list
>> lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
>> http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> --
> Jeff Johnson
> Co-Founder
> Aeon Computing
> 
> jeff.john...@aeoncomputing.com
> www.aeoncomputing.com
> t: 858-412-3810 x1001   f: 858-412-3845
> m: 619-204-9061
> 
> 4170 Morena Boulevard, Suite D - San Diego, CA 92117
> 
> High-Performance Computing / Lustre Filesystems / Scale-out Storage
> ___
> 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

Re: [lustre-discuss] Level 3 support

[Jeff Johnson]

Media malpractice. Intel still has it's level 3+ Lustre support function.
The media reporting of Intel's org changes was poor at best. Some of the
more inexperienced vendors may have lost touch with HPDD, my opinion.

--Jeff

On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 8:30 AM, Brian Andrus  wrote:

> With the relatively recent changes in Lustre support out there, I am
> curious as to what folks have started doing/planning for level 3 support.
>
> I know a few vendors that sell lustre based products but only provide
> first or second levels of support. They used to use Intel for 3rd level,
> which we had used in the past as well. But now they no longer offer it, so
> they are in a possible pickle if anything goes terribly south.
>
>
> Brian Andrus
>
> ___
> lustre-discuss mailing list
> lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
>



-- 
--
Jeff Johnson
Co-Founder
Aeon Computing

jeff.john...@aeoncomputing.com
www.aeoncomputing.com
t: 858-412-3810 x1001   f: 858-412-3845
m: 619-204-9061

4170 Morena Boulevard, Suite D - San Diego, CA 92117

High-Performance Computing / Lustre Filesystems / Scale-out Storage
___
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org

Re: [lustre-discuss] Level 3 support

[Bhakti, Micah K]

Hey Brian; Intel continues to provide level 3 support to our Lustre partners 
and has no plans to change this. Where did you see that we are no longer 
offering support?


Micah Bhakti

On 2/23/18, 8:31 AM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Brian Andrus" 
 
wrote:

With the relatively recent changes in Lustre support out there, I am 
curious as to what folks have started doing/planning for level 3 support.

I know a few vendors that sell lustre based products but only provide 
first or second levels of support. They used to use Intel for 3rd level, 
which we had used in the past as well. But now they no longer offer it, 
so they are in a possible pickle if anything goes terribly south.


Brian Andrus

___
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] Level 3 support

[Brian Andrus]

With the relatively recent changes in Lustre support out there, I am 
curious as to what folks have started doing/planning for level 3 support.


I know a few vendors that sell lustre based products but only provide 
first or second levels of support. They used to use Intel for 3rd level, 
which we had used in the past as well. But now they no longer offer it, 
so they are in a possible pickle if anything goes terribly south.



Brian Andrus

___
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org

Re: [lustre-discuss] What does your (next) MDT look like?

[Ben Evans]

Slightly left-field question for MDTs, will we enable data on inode for
really tiny files in ldiskfs?

-Ben

On 2/22/18, 2:02 PM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Dilger, Andreas"
 wrote:

>On Feb 6, 2018, at 10:32, E.S. Rosenberg 
>wrote:
>> 
>> Hello fellow Lustre users :)
>> 
>> Since I didn't want to take the "size of MDT, inode count, inode size"
>>thread too far off-topic I'm starting a new thread.
>> 
>> I'm curious how many people are using SSD MDTs?
>> Also how practical is such a thing in a 2.11.x Data On MDT scenario?
>> Is using some type of mix between HDD and SSD storage for MDTs
>>practical?
>> Does SSD vs HDD have an effect as far as ldiskfs vs zfs?
>
>It is worthwhile to mention that using DoM is going to be a lot easier
>with ZFS in a "fluid" usage environment than it will be with ldiskfs.
>The ZFS MDTs do not have pre-allocated inode/data separation, so enabling
>DoM will just mean you can put fewer inodes on the MDT if you put more
>data there.  With ldiskfs you have to decide this ratio at format time.
>The drawback is that ZFS is somewhat slower for metadata than ldiskfs,
>though it has improved in 2.10 significantly.
>
>Cheers, Andreas
>--
>Andreas Dilger
>Lustre Principal Architect
>Intel Corporation
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>___
>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