Michael,
Perhaps more importantly, Lustre 2.15 hasn't been released yet. (In general,
the recommended matrix is maintenance release to maintenance release - So 2.15
clients and 2.12 servers will be a recommended configuration, once 2.15 is
released.)
-Patrick
Hasan,
Historically, there have been several bugs related to write grant when
max_dirty_mb is set to large values (depending on a few other details of system
setup).
Write grant allows the client to write data in to memory and write it out
asynchronously. When write grant is not available to
Denis,
FYI, the git link you provided seems to be non-public - it asks for a GSI login.
Fortran is widely used for applications on Lustre, so it's unlikely to be a
fortran specific issue. If you're seeing I/O rates drop suddenly during
activity, rather than being reliably low for some
Ellis,
As you may have guessed, that function just set looks like a node which is
doing buffered I/O and thrashing for memory. No particular insight available
from the count of functions there.
Would you consider opening a bug report in the Whamcloud JIRA? You should have
enough for a good
No, and I'm not sure I agree with you at first glance.
Is this just generally an idea that data stored on SSD should not be in RAM?
If so, there's no mechanism for that other than using direct I/O.
-Patrick
From: lustre-discuss on behalf of
John Bauer
Sent:
Well, you could use two file descriptors, one for O_DIRECT one otherwise.
SSD is a fast medium but my instinct is the desirability of having data in RAM
is much more about I/O pattern and hard to optimize for in advance - Do you
read the data you wrote? (Or read data repeatedly?)
In any
Lustre doesn't show up in lsblk on the client because it isn't a block device
on the client. NFS and other network file systems also don't show up lsblk,
for the same reason.
-Patrick
From: lustre-discuss on behalf of
Shambhu Raje via lustre-discuss
Sent:
Marc,
[Re-posting to the list...]
No, it’s fine to have interaction during those times. The system is designed to
do that work online. Depending what you’re trying to do and what you’re
accessing, some client operations will experience delays, but that’s it. For
example, during
preferably 1MB multiples to maintain RAID alignment).
>
>Is this something that you would be willing to work on with guidance for the
>implementation details, or a feature request that you hope someone else will
>implement?
>
>Cheers, Andreas
>
>On Mar 29, 2023, at 07:41, Pat
Sven,
The "combining layouts without any data movement" part isn't currently
possible. It's probably possible in theory, but it's never been implemented.
(I'm curious what your use case is?)
Even allowing for data movement, there's no tool to do this for you. Depending
what you mean by
10 matches
Mail list logo
