[Lustre-discuss] is lustre for us?

[HyunSung Jang]

hello andreas,
i have totally different enviroment than mag's
we have many small file which less than 1Mb and i didn't (actually i can't)
know exactly how many it is.
it seems more than 10 millions of files..
in our situation, is lustre suitable??


On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 1:03 PM, Andreas Dilger <adilger at sun.com> wrote:

>  On Jul 05, 2008  13:36 -0400, Mag Gam wrote:
> > At my university we have a big storage problem. Currently we have 25
> Linux
> > servers each equiped with 3 TB of data. Totaling to 75TB of storage. We
> use
> > each server as a NFS server and have clients mount up the filesystem.
> They
> > are all connected by a GigE network.
> >
> > The problem we are facing is performance and scalibility. When a users
> > access data, many times they access the same server. This is becoming a
> huge
> > performance problem. The files sizes range from 8GB to 70GB.
> >
> >
> > Would Lustre solve our performance and management problem? How would
> lustre
> > scale? I have been reading the quickstart guide, is it easy to implement?
>
> As a general rule, Lustre performs very well with large files and linear
> IO patterns, which seems to match your usage.  You can get very good
> scaling (nearly linear with each OST) and a single client+server can
> saturate a GigE network (110MB/s).
>
> Configuring Lustre 1.6 isn't much different than NFS.  Format each server,
> mount them, then mount the clients.
>
> Cheers, Andreas
> --
> Andreas Dilger
> Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
> Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lustre-discuss mailing list
> Lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
> http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss-lustre.org/attachments/20080707/ab4dd5eb/attachment.htm>