I don't know if this still applies, but back when I was doing some work with Xen Hypervisor, loopback devices did not provide safe places to put files in a power failure.
Loopback did not make sure that things in memory were flushed to the file and synced to the disk, leaving dirty data in memory. Might want to verify this, just don't get caught with stuff in ram. Brock Palen www.umich.edu/~brockp Center for Advanced Computing [EMAIL PROTECTED] (734)936-1985 On Apr 14, 2008, at 3:12 PM, Jakob Goldbach wrote: > > On Mon, 2008-04-14 at 17:40 +0200, Fereyre Jerome wrote: >> Has anybody used loop devices for MGT? >> >> Since there's not so much information stored in this Target, it >> can be a good alternative to disk partitions... >> > > You could place it on the same partition/volume as the MDT but I > believe > you get less noise in dmesg during start/stop if you have the MGT and > MDT seperate as this allows you to start the MDT after your OSSs. > > I'm using an LVM volume for my MGS (and MDT - wanted to try the fast > scanner for backup which requires snapshoting). My MGS size is 64MB - > about 10% is used in a two oss + 3 clients setup. > > I'm also interested in knowing about how much space the MGT uses for a > many-node system. > > /Jakob > > _______________________________________________ > Lustre-discuss mailing list > Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org > http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss > > _______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list Lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss