[lustre-discuss] Designing a new Lustre system

[Glenn Lockwood]

On Wed, Dec 20, 2017 at 8:21 AM, E.S. Rosenberg <esr+lustre at mail.hebrew.edu>
wrote:

>
> 4. One of my colleagues likes Isilon very much, I have not been able to
> find any literature on if/how Lustre compares any pointers/knowledge on the
> subject is very welcome.
>
>
I haven't looked at Isilon in a while, but my recollection was that

1. It's phenomenally expensive, especially at smaller scales.  This is the
most obvious detractor vs. Lustre, especially at low node counts.

2. It's completely proprietary and architecturally complex, so management
and support model is difficult to shape into existing operations.  There
are also cost implications here.

3. It uses NFS for transport, so it doesn't offer POSIX consistency between
clients.  This makes shared-file parallel I/O extremely hazardous.

In my experience, Isilon is popular in markets flush with money but scarce
in institutional storage expertise.  In such cases, #1 and #2 are
non-issues, and #3 often doesn't apply because such industries' workloads
are throughput-oriented and rarely use MPI.

Glenn
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss-lustre.org/attachments/20171221/30067228/attachment.html>