From indivar.nair at techterra.in Tue Sep 6 06:33:42 2011 From: indivar.nair at techterra.in (Indivar Nair) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 12:03:42 +0530 Subject: [Lustre-devel] Slow Directory Listing Message-ID: Hi ..., I have a lustre storage that stores lots of small files i.e. hundreds to thousand of 9MB image files. While normal file access works fine, the directory listing is extremely slow. Depending on the number of files in a directory, the listing takes around 5 - 15 secs. I tried 'ls --color=none' and it worked fine; listed the contents immediately. But that doesn't help my cause. I have Samba Gateway Servers, and all users access the storage through the gateway. Double clicking on directory takes a long long time to display. The cluster consist of - - two DRBD Mirrored MDS Servers (Dell R610s) with 10K RPM disks - four OSS Nodes (2 Node Cluster (Dell R710s) with a common storage (Dell MD3200)) The storage consists of 12 x 1TB HDDs on both arrays, in RAID 6 Configuration. What actually happens when one does a listing like this? What can I do to make the listing faster? Could it be an MDS issue? Some site suggested that this could be caused due to '-o flock' switch. Is it so? Kindly Help. The storage is in Production, and this is causing a lot of issues. Regards, Indivar Nair -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From indivar.nair at techterra.in Tue Sep 6 06:43:58 2011 From: indivar.nair at techterra.in (Indivar Nair) Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 12:13:58 +0530 Subject: [Lustre-devel] Slow Directory Listing In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi ..., I have a lustre storage that stores lots of small files i.e. hundreds to thousand of 9MB image files. While normal file access works fine, the directory listing is extremely slow. Depending on the number of files in a directory, the listing takes around 5 - 15 secs. I tried 'ls --color=none' and it worked fine; listed the contents immediately. But that doesn't help my cause. I have Samba Gateway Servers, and all users access the storage through the gateway. Double clicking on directory takes a long long time to display. The cluster consist of - - two DRBD Mirrored MDS Servers (Dell R610s) with 10K RPM disks - four OSS Nodes (2 Node Cluster (Dell R710s) with a common storage (Dell MD3200)) The storage consists of 12 x 1TB HDDs on both arrays, in RAID 6 Configuration. What actually happens when one does a listing like this? What can I do to make the listing faster? Could it be an MDS issue? Some site suggested that this could be caused due to '-o flock' switch. Is it so? Kindly Help. The storage is in Production, and this is causing a lot of issues. Regards, Indivar Nair -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From allreol at gmail.com Sun Sep 18 07:34:54 2011 From: allreol at gmail.com (He Xiaobin) Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2011 15:34:54 +0800 Subject: [Lustre-devel] Is that possible for lnet to be a independent project? Message-ID: Lnet of Lustre shows good features of network abstraction. After reading Lustre documents and codes, I realized that lnet is loosely coupled with the other modules in Lustre system. So I think it will be a good advise for lnet to be a independent project with Lustre. Such that other systems working in linux kernel mode can use lnet for data transferring. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From peter_braam at xyratex.com Tue Sep 27 12:47:17 2011 From: peter_braam at xyratex.com (Peter Braam) Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 12:47:17 +0000 Subject: [Lustre-devel] question about failover Message-ID: Greetings - The general question is how do router failures and server failover interact? My suspicion is that is it necessary for the routing topology and server topology to be such that server failures one wants to recover from always leave working servers connected to the router, so that at least some traffic makes it through that router, and it won't be declared failed also. Is that right? As an example, point to point connections between two routers and a singe failover pair are to be avoided, because it becomes impossible to distinguish server and router failures. Is that a rule that is generally followed? Thanks! Peter ______________________________________________________________________ This email may contain privileged or confidential information, which should only be used for the purpose for which it was sent by Xyratex. No further rights or licenses are granted to use such information. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, please notify the sender by return and delete it. You may not use, copy, disclose or rely on the information contained in it. Internet email is susceptible to data corruption, interception and unauthorised amendment for which Xyratex does not accept liability. While we have taken reasonable precautions to ensure that this email is free of viruses, Xyratex does not accept liability for the presence of any computer viruses in this email, nor for any losses caused as a result of viruses. Xyratex Technology Limited (03134912), Registered in England & Wales, Registered Office, Langstone Road, Havant, Hampshire, PO9 1SA. The Xyratex group of companies also includes, Xyratex Ltd, registered in Bermuda, Xyratex International Inc, registered in California, Xyratex (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd registered in Malaysia, Xyratex Technology (Wuxi) Co Ltd registered in The People's Republic of China and Xyratex Japan Limited registered in Japan. ______________________________________________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: