[Lustre-devel] Thoughts on benchmarking

Andreas Dilger adilger at sun.com
Fri Feb 29 13:10:14 PST 2008

On Feb 28, 2008  20:20 -0700, Peter J. Braam wrote:
> I see some worrying dips in the graphs - can our I/O specialists comment on
> which ones are understood and which are not?

I think one of the major problems that Andrew discusses at the end of
the test runs is described in bug 7365 "Poor performance when files share
an OSC".  I didn't see anywhere in the paper which version of Lustre was
being tested, but I know we did some work to improve the round-robin
allocator to make it more uniform in more recent releases, up to a
certain extent.

That said, getting completely uniform file distribution will still need
some effort, because the MDS doesn't do any correlation between create
requests (e.g. from a single job, from a single client, etc).

> On 2/25/08 2:44 PM, "Andrew C. Uselton" <acuselton at lbl.gov> wrote:
> >   I'd been in conversation with Cliff White over the last few weeks, and
> > he'd expressed an interest in having me post a draft of a report I've
> > been working on.  If you've already heard of it here it is.  For those
> > who hadn't I'll try to describe it briefly.
> > 
> >   In December I assisted with some Lustre benchmark tests on the
> > Franklin Cray XT here at NERSC.  Since then I've tried to summarize our
> > analysis and results.  The attached pdf is a draft of that summary.  The
> > introduction is almost completely useless, so feel free to skip (unless
> > you want to have a laugh at the author's expense).  Section 3 has the
> > main details about what we observed and what we thought about it.
> > Section 2 may be amusing for those (like me) who care about methodology.

Cheers, Andreas
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.

More information about the lustre-devel mailing list