I just found this old email in my spam folder...

On Apr 21, 2020, at 14:54, Pinkesh Valdria 
<pinkesh.vald...@oracle.com<mailto:pinkesh.vald...@oracle.com>> wrote:

Does lustre have mount options to mimic  NFS mount option behavior , listed 
below?

I know in most cases,  Lustre would perform much better than NFS and can scale 
and support a lot of clients in parallel.   I have a use case,  where there are 
only few clients accessing the filesystem and the files are really small, but 
in millions and files are very infrequently updated.   The files are stored on 
an NFS server and its mounted on the clients with the below mount options, 
which results in caching of file attributes/metadata on the client and thus 
reduces # of calls to metadata and delivers better performance.

NFS mount options
type nfs (rw,nolock,nocto,actimeo=900,nfsvers=3,proto=tcp)

Lustre will already cache file attributes and data on the client, since it is 
totally coherent, and doesn't depend on random timeouts like NFS to decide 
whether the client should cache the data or not.

A custom proprietary application which compile (make command) on some of these 
files takes 20-24 seconds to run.  The same command when ran on the same files 
stored in BeeGFS parallel filesystem takes 80-90 seconds (4x times slow),  
mainly because there is no client caching in BeeGFS and client has to make a 
lot more metadata calls compared to NFS cache file attributes.

Question
I already tried BeeGFS and I am asking this question to determine, if Lustre 
performance would be better than NFS for very small file workloads (50 bytes, 
200 bytes, 2KB files) with 5 millions files spread across nested directories.  
Does lustre have mount options to mimic  NFS mount option behavior, listed 
below? Or is there some optional feature in Lustre to achieve this cache  
behavior?

Yes, Lustre will already/always have the desired caching behavior by default, 
no settings needed.  Some tuning might be needed if the working set is so large 
(10,000s of files) that the locks protecting the data are cancelled because of 
the sheer volume of data or because the files are unused for a long time (i.e. 
over 1h).

Since Lustre can be downloaded for free, you could always give your application 
workload a test, to see what the performance is.

For very small files, you might want to consider to use Data-on-MDT (DoM) by 
running "lfs setstripe -E 64k -L mdt -E64M -c 1 -Eeof -c -1 $dir" on the test 
directory (or on the root directory of the filesystem) to have it store these 
tiny files directly on the MDT.  You would in that case need enough free space 
on the MDT to hold all of the files.

Cheers, Andreas




https://linux.die.net/man/5/nfs

ac / noac
Selects whether the client may cache file attributes. If neither option is 
specified (or if ac is specified), the client caches file attributes.

For my custom applications,  cache of file attributes is fine (no negative 
impact) and it helps to improve performance of NFS.


actimeo=n

Using actimeo sets all of acregmin, acregmax, acdirmin, and acdirmax to the 
same value. If this option is not specified, the NFS client uses the defaults 
for each of these options listed above.

For my applications, it’s okay to use cache file attributes/metadata for few 
mins (eg: 5mins)  by setting this value, it can reduce # of metadata calls been 
made to the server and especially with filesystems storing lot of small files,  
it’s a huge performance penalty, which can be avoided.

nolock

When mounting servers that do not support the NLM protocol, or when mounting an 
NFS server through a firewall that blocks the NLM service port, specify the 
nolock mount option.Specifying the nolock option may also be advised to improve 
the performance of a proprietary application which runs on a single client and 
uses file locks extensively.


Appreciate any guidance.

Thanks,
pinkesh valdria
_______________________________________________
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org<mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org

Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Principal Lustre Architect
Whamcloud






_______________________________________________
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org

Reply via email to