[lustre-discuss] Avoiding system cache when using ssd pfl extent

Patrick Farrell pfarrell at ddn.com
Thu May 19 11:05:02 PDT 2022

No, and I'm not sure I agree with you at first glance.

Is this just generally an idea that data stored on SSD should not be in RAM?  If so, there's no mechanism for that other than using direct I/O.

From: lustre-discuss <lustre-discuss-bounces at lists.lustre.org> on behalf of John Bauer <bauerj at iodoctors.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2022 12:48 PM
To: lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org <lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org>
Subject: [lustre-discuss] Avoiding system cache when using ssd pfl extent

When using PFL, and using an SSD as the first extent, it seems it would
be advantageous to not have that extent's file data consume memory in
the client's system buffers.  It would be similar to using O_DIRECT, but
on a per-extent basis.  Is there a mechanism for that already?



lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss at lists.lustre.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lustre.org/pipermail/lustre-discuss-lustre.org/attachments/20220519/778d89e4/attachment.html>

More information about the lustre-discuss mailing list