[lustre-discuss] varying sequential read performance.
shawn.hall at nag.com
Thu Apr 5 12:47:45 PDT 2018
Simpler yet, I believe you can just manually set the OST index on which you would like the file to reside.
lfs setstripe -c 1 -i 0 file_on_ost0
lfs setstripe -c 1 -i 1 file_on_ost1
On 4/5/18, 3:42 PM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Scott Denham" <lustre-discuss-bounces at lists.lustre.org on behalf of sdenham at cray.com> wrote:
>From: John Bent <johnbent at gmail.com>
>To: John Bauer <bauerj at iodoctors.com>
>Subject: Re: [lustre-discuss] varying sequential read performance.
> "I suspect that this OSC is using an OSS that is under heavier load."
> If you want to confirm this, it seems like you could create files with
> striping parameters such that you have a single file on each OSS. Well, I
> know you can make stripe=1 so it's only on one OSS but can you
> control/query on *which* OSS is the stripe? Assuming you can, then you
> just benchmark performance for each file (i.e. OSS) and you can discover
> more explicitly whether you have a slow OSS.
We have used Lustre pools in the past for this. They can overlap, so it is
Possible to create N pools with each pool containing only one OSS.
Staff Engineer - Presales at Cray, Inc
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the lustre-discuss