[Lustre-discuss] Lustre locking

Mag Gam magawake at gmail.com
Fri Jan 16 16:22:52 PST 2009

Thanks Andreas.

We also run Sun Grid Engine for our engineering department. Out setup
is basically like this:

Master -- QMASTER (1 server)
Slaves -- EXECD (300 servers)

They are share a filesystem which is running of Lustre. Grid Engine
has a Berkeley Database as its backend. I am wondering if I need to
change all of my slaves and master to distributed locking or local

Any thoughts?


On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 10:10 AM, Andreas Dilger <adilger at sun.com> wrote:
> On Jan 16, 2009  00:52 -0500, Mag Gam wrote:
>> At our university many of our students and professors use SQLite and
>> Berkley DB for their projects. Probally, BDB more than SQLite. Would I
>> we need to have Lustre mounted up a certain way to avoid corruption
>> via file locking? Any thoughts about this?
> That depends on how they use it.  Mounting Lustre with "-o localflock"
> will provide locking on a single node without any performance impact,
> which is enough for single-node databases like SQLite and Berkley DB.
> Cheers, Andreas
> --
> Andreas Dilger
> Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
> Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.

More information about the lustre-discuss mailing list