[Lustre-devel] How store HSM metadata in MDT ?
lee at sandia.gov
Sun Jul 6 12:24:47 PDT 2008
Are you all talking about HSM, really, or simply backup?
If backup, read no further.
If HSM, then, do you intend that the user be allowed to specify *which*
version of the file content is desired?
If yes and you also want the standard API and utilities to function,
seamlessly, then the version must be exposed in the name space, no? I.e.
For any file named "foo" with 3 versions, for instance, there would be
foo;1, foo;2, foo;3, and "foo" which is an alias for "foo;1".
If no, then, you'll have to craft a special API that will motivate
special tools. However, HPSS already has this API and set of tools so
what's the point? Wouldn't it be better to just modify HPSS to
If HSM, then, do you intend that two users might be allowed to work with
two, or more, versions of the file content simultaneously?
If yes then same problem as above since those two versions might need to
be in the same directory, at the same time, right?
No matter what you do, you have problems that can't be resolved when
mixing a POSIX name space with file versions, I believe. Since POSIX
reserves no characters you can't pick a scheme that includes version
information in the name without at least being confusing and the API
provides no other way to specify the version, no?
My personal choice would be to shy off direct version support by the
native file system. It doesn't seem to have a reasonable solution
without involving the user somehow to specify names or naming schemes.
That kind of involvement just begs for a special utility and, once
there, relieves the file system of the need to support any but the most
recent version itself, anyway.
On Sat, 2008-07-05 at 21:24 -0600, Peter Braam wrote:
> On 7/4/08 8:37 AM, "Aurelien Degremont" <aurelien.degremont at cea.fr> wrote:
> > Peter Braam a écrit :
> >> If there is more than one copy in the archive, it would be preferable if the
> >> archive could maintain a mapping from the Lustre fid of the file to the
> >> archived copies. Associated with the FID of the data would then be a list
> >> of archived copies, timestamps etc.
> > Do you mean that the HSM will be aware of various versions of one same
> > file, identified in Lustre by a FID ?
> > Or this will be masked by the archiving tool , doing some tricks to
> > simulate it ?
> >> Can that be done in HPSS?
> > HPSS alone cannot do versioning on its files presently.
> But your archiving utility that copies from Lustre to HPSS can maintain
> database of these objects - no need to store anything in Lustre.
> >> If not, policy related operations like purging older files etc will become
> >> very complex and not scalable. For example, a search to find older files in
> >> the archive would require an e2scan operation to find the inodes and then
> >> the objects in the archive. If the file system was not available anymore
> >> (for whatever reason), it is not even clear that such a purge could still
> >> happen.
> >> With an archive based database this can be an indexed search in the archive,
> >> which is faster and more appropriate.
> > By purgin do mean purging in Lustre or in the HSM?
> The HSM.
> > There's no issue with purging in Lustre because this do not imply the HSM.
> > And removal of oldest copies in the HSM could be done asynchronously,
> > slowly.
> There is a rule in Lustre - no scanning, ever. This rule will not be broken
> by HSM.
> So, you have to move your management of ID's of the archvied copies outside
> of Lustre, in some database. This will actually save you time - doing this
> in the MDS will be no fun.
> The MDS should only get attributes to indicate if and what version of a file
> is in the archive and a cursor (maybe other information) in relation with
> ongoing restores.
> > I'm not sure I see what you mean here
> Lustre-devel mailing list
> Lustre-devel at lists.lustre.org
More information about the lustre-devel