[lustre-discuss] 1 MDS and 1 OSS

Ben Evans bevans at cray.com
Mon Oct 30 09:55:19 PDT 2017


How many OST's are behind that OSS?  How many MDT's behind the MDS?

From: lustre-discuss <lustre-discuss-bounces at lists.lustre.org<mailto:lustre-discuss-bounces at lists.lustre.org>> on behalf of Brian Andrus <toomuchit at gmail.com<mailto:toomuchit at gmail.com>>
Date: Monday, October 30, 2017 at 12:24 PM
To: "lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org<mailto:lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org>" <lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org<mailto:lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org>>
Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] 1 MDS and 1 OSS


Hmm. That is an odd one from a quick thought...

However, IF you are planning on growing and adding OSSes/OSTs, this is not a bad way to get started and used to how everything works. It is basically a single stripe storage.

If you are not planning on growing, I would lean towards gluster on 2 boxes. I do that often, actually. A single MDS/OSS has zero redundancy, unless something is being done at harware level and that would help in availability.
NFS is quite viable too, but you would be splitting the available storage on 2 boxes.

Brian Andrus


On 10/30/2017 12:47 AM, Amjad Syed wrote:
Hello
We are in process in procuring one small Lustre filesystem giving us 120 TB  of storage using Lustre 2.X.
The vendor has proposed only 1 MDS and 1 OSS as a solution.
The query we have is that is this configuration enough , or we need more OSS?
The MDS and OSS server are identical  with regards to RAM (64 GB) and  HDD (300GB)

Thanks
Majid



_______________________________________________
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org<mailto:lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org>http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss-lustre.org/attachments/20171030/f7c81bef/attachment.html>


More information about the lustre-discuss mailing list