Hi Megan, I have no experience with DDN, but totally agree with Cory on interoperability. in our environment we have mixed lustre 2.9, 2.10, 2.12, depend on HW age.
we had some problems with 2.9 - 2.12.x with multihomed clients, but by tweaking lnet configs everything is working w/o problems. We stopped tracking client/server versions 😊. PS important point is we don't use logging and projects quotas. Spitz, Cory James via lustre-discuss <lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org> schrieb am Di., 30. März 2021, 19:55: > Hello, Megan. > > > I was curious why you made this comment: > > > A general example is a box with lustre-client 2.10.4 is not going to be > completely happy with a new 2.12.x on the lustre network > > In general, I think that the two LTS release are very interoperable. What > incompatibility are you referring to? Do you have a well-known LU or two > to share? > > > > Thanks, > > -Cory > > > > > > On 3/30/21, 12:14 PM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Ms. Megan Larko via > lustre-discuss" <lustre-discuss-boun...@lists.lustre.org on behalf of > lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org> wrote: > > > > Hello! > > > > I have no direct experience with the DDN AI400X, but as a vendor DDN has > some nice value-add to the Lustre systems they build. Having worked with > other DDN Lustre hw in my career, interoperability with other Lustre mounts > is usually not an issue unless the current lustre-client software on the > client boxes is a very different software version or network stack. A > general example is a box with lustre-client 2.10.4 is not going to be > completely happy with a new 2.12.x on the lustre network. As far as vendor > lock-in, DDN support in my past experience does have its own value-add to > their Lustre storage product so it is not completely vanilla. I have found > the enhancements useful. As far as your total admin control of the DDN > storage product, that is probably up to the terms of the service agreement > made with purchase. My one experience with DDN on that is contractually > DDN maintained the box version level and patches, standard Lustre tunables > were fine for local admins. In one case we did stumble upon a bug, I was > permitted to dig around freely but not to change anything; I shared my > findings with the DDN team. It worked out well for us. > > > > P.S. I am not in any way employed or compensated by DDN. I'm just > sharing my own experience. Smile. > > > > Cheers, > > megan > _______________________________________________ > lustre-discuss mailing list > lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org > http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org >
_______________________________________________ lustre-discuss mailing list lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org
