On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 19:56 -0700, ron minnich wrote: > > 2. do we have anybody successfully managing that much storage that is > > also spread across the nodes? And if so, what's the best practices > > out there to make the client not worry about where does the storage > > actually come from (IOW, any kind of proxying of I/O, etc) > > Google?
By "we" I mostly meant this community, but even if we don't focus on 9fans, Google is a non-example. They have no clients for this filesystem per-se. > >> The request: for each of the (lots of) compute nodes, have them mount > >> over 9p to, say 100x fewer io nodes, each of those to run lustre. > > > > Sorry for being dense, but what exactly is going to be accomplished > > by proxying I/O in such a way? > > it makes the unscalable distributed lock manager and other such stuff > work, because you stop asking it to scale. So strictly speaking you are not really using 9P as a filesystem protocol, but rather as a convenient way for doing RPC, right? Thanks, Roman.
