have you run any analysis on the "A clone of these repo takes 550 seconds on lustre", where you track the exact OP calls on lustre to see if it's a general slowness or if there is a specific OP that git is abusing? i wonder if there's something specific that git is doing that lustre is unhappy with versus continuing to poke at the hardware or software tuning.
thought less likely, i'd also be curious if you have any security/audit controls turned on on the clients. i have some silly ones where i'm at that slow things down on lustre but not nfs because of how the kernel treats the filesystem i don't have any git repo's even close to that size so i can't perform the same analysis where i'm at. On Mon, Jan 11, 2021 at 1:45 PM Vicker, Darby J. (JSC-EG111)[Jacobs Technology, Inc.] <darby.vicke...@nasa.gov> wrote: > > Sure. Its a custom configuration on commodity hardware, which is quite a bit > newer than the luster servers. The overall setup is a bit complicated to > support HA - two servers with an external JBOD with ZFS to manage the drives > and the file system. PCS to do the failover. But none of that is too > relevant in terms of performance so here are the hardware specs. > > Servers: > 192 GB DDR4 2666 MHz ECC Memory > 16 total physical cores (2x Intel Xeon Gold 6144 CPU @ 3.50GHz) > LSI SAS Card (can't find exact model but very similar to the cards in the > lustre servers) > > JBOD: > Supermicro 3.5" > 24x 10TB 7200 RPM Seagate HDD's > > ZFS is used to configure the drives in a RAID10 with a zfs file system built > on the zpool. This is exported via NFS. The only NFS tuning we are doing is > to increase RPCNFSDCOUNT to 128 and export with async. > > So the HW configuration is overall fairly similar. This is another reason > I'm hopeful that we'd be able to get our lustre MD performance as good or > better than the NFS server given that the lustre MDS has SSD's and the NFS > server has HDD's. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: lustre-discuss <lustre-discuss-boun...@lists.lustre.org> on behalf of > Michael Di Domenico <mdidomeni...@gmail.com> > Date: Monday, January 11, 2021 at 8:07 AM > Cc: "lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org" <lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [lustre-discuss] Tuning for metadata performance > > perhaps i missed it somewhere, but in order to do a fair comparison > can you detail the hardware/software behind the nfs server? > > _______________________________________________ lustre-discuss mailing list lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
