[Lustre-discuss] Lustre Performance

[Jeremy Mann]

I have to agree with Brian, the scalability factor is where Lustre really
shines. One more thing to add would be to try different stripe sizes. Each
application has its own optimal stripe size so experiment with different
stripes.

On our 19 dual channel bonded GigE OSTs, we see sustained speeds of 200
GB/s when reading the NCBI databases.

Brian J. Murrell wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-10-29 at 12:17 +0000, Iain Grant wrote:
>
>> Now to be honest I am not seeing any difference in Lustre compared
>> with NFS
>
> You won't.  Lustre's shining point is not that it's faster than NFS
> given a single server and single disk, but rather that it scales
> incredibly well.
>
> Try adding more disks and (when you max out the bandwidth of that single
> machine's disk or network -- whichever comes first) add a second (and
> third and fourth, etc.) OSS.  Then try some benchmarks.
>
> When you have maxed out the network bandwidth between your client and
> the Lustre servers, add a second and third, etc. clients and try a
> collective benchmark across all of the clients.
>
> This is where Lustre shines.
>
> b.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lustre-discuss mailing list
> Lustre-discuss at clusterfs.com
> https://mail.clusterfs.com/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
>


-- 
Jeremy Mann
jeremy at biochem.uthscsa.edu

University of Texas Health Science Center
Bioinformatics Core Facility
http://www.bioinformatics.uthscsa.edu
Phone: (210) 567-2672