On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Andreas Joachim Peters
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I think you need to support the following functionality to support HSM (file 
> not block based):
>
> 1 implement a trigger on file creation/modification/deletion
>
> 2 store the additional HSM identifier for recall as a file attribute
>
> 3 policy based purging of file related blocks (LRU cache etc.)
>
> 4 implement an optional trigger to recall a purged file and block the IO (our 
> experience is that automatic recalls are problematic for huge installations 
> if the aggregation window for desired recalls is short since they create 
> inefficient and chaotic access on tapes)
>
> 5 either snapshot a file before migration, do an exclusive lock or freeze it 
> to avoid modifications during migration (you need to have a unique enough 
> identifier for a file, either inode/path + checksum or also inode/path + 
> modification time works)

DMAPI seems to be the natural choice for items 1 & 4 above.

> FYI: there was a paper about migration policy scanning performance by IBM two 
> years ago:
> http://domino.watson.ibm.com/library/CyberDig.nsf/papers/4A50C2D66A1F90F7852578E3005A2034/$File/rj10484.pdf

An important omission in that paper is the exact ILM policy that was
used to scan the file system. I strongly suspect that it was a
catch-all policy that matches every file without examining any
metadata. When you add conditions that check file metadata, scan time
would increase, probably by a few orders of magnitude.

-- 
Dmitry Borodaenko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ceph-devel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to