Re: [lustre-discuss] Experience with DDN AI400X

[Andreas Dilger via lustre-discuss]

On Mar 30, 2021, at 11:54, Spitz, Cory James via lustre-discuss 
mailto:lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org>> wrote:

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?

This could potentially relate to changes with configuring Multi-Rail LNet 
between those releases?

On 3/30/21, 12:14 PM, "lustre-discuss on behalf of Ms. Megan Larko via 
lustre-discuss" 
mailto: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

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

Re: [lustre-discuss] Experience with DDN AI400X

[Arman Khalatyan via lustre-discuss]

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 
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@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

Re: [lustre-discuss] Experience with DDN AI400X

[Spitz, Cory James via lustre-discuss]

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" 
mailto: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] Experience with DDN AI400X

[Ms. Megan Larko via lustre-discuss]

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] Experience with DDN AI400X

[E.S. Rosenberg]

Hi everyone,
Haven't been on this list for a while :)
At my new job we are considering getting a DDN AI400X system which as far
as I understood from them is Lustre for some machine learning nodes.
I'm just wondering how nice these play with other lustre systems, am I
getting myself a vendor lock-in because they don't play nicely or will I be
able to treat this like any Lustre box?

The previous small Lustre system I managed was pizza box servers connected
to external RAID enclosures which basically meant I could do as I wished
with the system and expand with any brand, as I recall it has been reported
on this list that people run very mixed setups at some locations with
equipment spanning multiple generations.

Thanks,
Eli
___
lustre-discuss mailing list
lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
http://lists.lustre.org/listinfo.cgi/lustre-discuss-lustre.org