[Lustre-discuss] Lustre MPI-IO performance on CNL
Weikuan Yu
weikuan.yu at gmail.com
Wed Mar 5 10:58:11 PST 2008
> What is the stripe_size of this test? 4M? If it is 4M, then
> transfer_size is a little
> bigger(64M). And we have seen this situation before, finally it seems
> because client hold
> too much lock in each write(because of lustre down-forward extent lock
> policy) which might
> block other client writing, so impact the parallel of the whole system.
> Maybe you could try
> decrease transfer size to stripe_size. Or increase stripe_size to 64M
> and see how is it?
Yes, the situation between shared file and separated files has been seen
before. But I have never seen an explanation regarding CNL. BTW, this
performance difference between shared/separated stays the same,
regardless what transfer size is.
Anybody wants to post a reason regarding direct I/O too?
--Weikuan
More information about the lustre-discuss
mailing list