[Lustre-discuss] Performance dropoff for a nearly full Lustre file system

[Bob Ball]

In my memory, it is not recommended to run Lustre more than 90% full.

bob

On 1/14/2015 2:43 PM, Mike Selway wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
>                I’m looking for experiences for what has been observed 
> to happen (performance drop offs, severity of drops, partial/full 
> failures, …) when an operational Lustre File System has been almost 
> “filled”… percentages of interest are in the range from say 80% to 
> 99%. Multiple responses appreciated.
>
> Also, comments from anyone who has implemented a Robin Hood approach, 
> about how they worked to avoid performance drop offs of a “near full” 
> file system by “archiving and releasing data blocks” to 
> auto-reconstruct continuous data areas.
>
> Thanks!
> Mike
>
> *Mike Selway****|** Sr. Storage Architect (TAS) | Cray Inc.*
>
> Work+1-301-332-4116 | mselway at cray.com
>
> 146 Castlemaine Ct, Castle Rock,  CO  80104|  Check out Tiered 
> Adaptive Storage (TAS)! 
> <http://www.cray.com/Products/Storage/Tiered-Adaptive-Storage.aspx>
>
> cid:image001.png at 01CF36E5.85AF42A0 <http://www.cray.com/>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150114/8618f787/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/png
Size: 5290 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss-lustre.org/attachments/20150114/8618f787/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2329 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss-lustre.org/attachments/20150114/8618f787/attachment.jpeg>