From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1Grd7K-0005ab-SO for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 05 Dec 2006 16:26:03 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id kB5GPFHD000332; Tue, 5 Dec 2006 16:25:15 GMT Received: from ece06.nas.nasa.gov (ece06.nas.nasa.gov [129.99.139.32]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id kB5GPC4X029797 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2006 16:25:14 GMT Received: from ece06 (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ece06.nas.nasa.gov (8.13.7/8.13.4) with ESMTP id kB5GPBA9031295 for ; Tue, 5 Dec 2006 08:25:11 -0800 Message-Id: <200612051625.kB5GPBA9031295@ece06.nas.nasa.gov> To: gentoo-cluster@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-cluster] examples of (large) Gentoo clusters In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 05 Dec 2006 08:18:47 EST." <17781.29111.851760.896800@gs105.sicortex.com> X-url: http://www.nas.nasa.gov/~bgreen/ Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2006 08:25:11 -0800 From: Bryan Green Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-cluster@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-cluster@lists.gentoo.org X-Archives-Salt: 2982c56f-2aef-49f8-8ec6-4cae5703fbb0 X-Archives-Hash: 8a3f112213db83e29af54bfdcf18d43e "John R. Dunning" writes: > > Lustre 1.6 (at least the client end) doesn't even really *require* all those > kernel patches, ie they do support the idea of a patchless client. The issue > is that lustre changes the logic involved in various kinds of fs operations, > including anything related to lookups, so as to short-circuit much of the wor > k > involved when it figures out that it can do so. Running the client without > the patches will work, but it won't give you the performance that you'd get > with the patches. So odds are anybody who's interested in running lustre in > the first place probably wants the patches too. I hadn't realized that the patchless client was potentially lower-performance than a patched client. Are you sure about that? How much of a difference do you think it is? Are you using version 1.6 or 1.4? > > We at sicortex are planning on rolling out a gentoo-based cluster that depend > s > heavily on lustre, so we've spent a fair bit of time banging on it. I'm > pretty sure we understand it at this point. We'll know for sure soon :-} Do you get support from CFS? It seems pretty clear that you do not. What kernel versions do you use? -bryan -- gentoo-cluster@gentoo.org mailing list