Re: [lustre-discuss] Lustre snapshots

2019-05-31 Thread Andreas Dilger
Yes, from the Lustre point of view, the snapshots are currently totally 
separate filesystems.

You would need to generate the automount map from "lctl snapshot_list".  
However, if you mounted a client on the MGS temporarily after creating the 
snapshot you could write the automount map into e.g. 
"/mnt/lustre/.snapshot/automountmap" so that it would immediately be visible to 
all clients mounting the filesystem, and immediately unmount the filesystem 
again.  Of course you could use some other mechanism to distribute it as well.

Cheers, Andreas

On May 30, 2019, at 08:26, Hans Henrik Happe  wrote:
> 
> It's only the mapping from the snapshot name to hex value used for
> mounting I'm asking about. It's explained in the doc (30.3.3. Mounting a
> Snapshot).
> 
> The client cannot call 'lctl snapshot_list'. Guess the main fs and its
> snapshot fs' are so separated that putting the mappings in the client
> /proc structures of the main fs would become ugly.
> 
> We will just communicate client mount name through another channel.
> 
> Cheers,
> Hans Henrik
> 
> On 30/05/2019 10.05, Andreas Dilger wrote:
>> On May 30, 2019, at 01:50, Hans Henrik Happe  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I've tested snapshots and they work as expected.
>>> 
>>> However, I'm wondering how the clients should mount without knowing the
>>> mount names of snapshots. As I see it there are two possibilities:
>>> 
>>> 1. Clients get ssh (limited) access to MGS (Don't want that).
>>> 2. The names are communicated through another channel. Perhaps, written
>>> to a file on the head Lustre filesystem or just directly to all clients
>>> that need snapshot mounting through ssh.
>>> 
>>> If there isn't a better way, I think number two is the way to go.
>> 
>> You could use automount to mount the snapshots on the clients, when they are 
>> needed.  The automount map could be created automatically from the snapshot 
>> list.
>> 
>> Probably it makes the most sense to limit snapshot access to a subset of 
>> nodes, such as user login nodes, so that users do not try to compute from 
>> the snapshot filesystems directly.
>> 
>>> Guess the limited length of Lustre fs names is preventing the use of the
>>> snapshots names directly?
>> 
>> If you rotate the snapshots like Apple Time Machine, you could use generic 
>> snapshot names like "last_month", "last_week", "yesterday", "6h_ago" and 
>> such and not have to update the automount map.  The filesystem names could 
>> be mostly irrelevant if the snapshot mountpoints are chosen properly, like 
>> "$MOUNT/.snapshot/last_month/" or similar.
>> 
>> Cheers, Andreas
>> --
>> Andreas Dilger
>> Principal Lustre Architect
>> Whamcloud
>> 

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] Lustre snapshots

2019-05-30 Thread Hans Henrik Happe
It's only the mapping from the snapshot name to hex value used for
mounting I'm asking about. It's explained in the doc (30.3.3. Mounting a
Snapshot).

The client cannot call 'lctl snapshot_list'. Guess the main fs and its
snapshot fs' are so separated that putting the mappings in the client
/proc structures of the main fs would become ugly.

We will just communicate client mount name through another channel.

Cheers,
Hans Henrik

On 30/05/2019 10.05, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On May 30, 2019, at 01:50, Hans Henrik Happe  wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I've tested snapshots and they work as expected.
>>
>> However, I'm wondering how the clients should mount without knowing the
>> mount names of snapshots. As I see it there are two possibilities:
>>
>> 1. Clients get ssh (limited) access to MGS (Don't want that).
>> 2. The names are communicated through another channel. Perhaps, written
>> to a file on the head Lustre filesystem or just directly to all clients
>> that need snapshot mounting through ssh.
>>
>> If there isn't a better way, I think number two is the way to go.
> 
> You could use automount to mount the snapshots on the clients, when they are 
> needed.  The automount map could be created automatically from the snapshot 
> list.
> 
> Probably it makes the most sense to limit snapshot access to a subset of 
> nodes, such as user login nodes, so that users do not try to compute from the 
> snapshot filesystems directly.
> 
>> Guess the limited length of Lustre fs names is preventing the use of the
>> snapshots names directly?
> 
> If you rotate the snapshots like Apple Time Machine, you could use generic 
> snapshot names like "last_month", "last_week", "yesterday", "6h_ago" and such 
> and not have to update the automount map.  The filesystem names could be 
> mostly irrelevant if the snapshot mountpoints are chosen properly, like 
> "$MOUNT/.snapshot/last_month/" or similar.
> 
> 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] Lustre snapshots

2019-05-30 Thread Andreas Dilger
On May 30, 2019, at 01:50, Hans Henrik Happe  wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I've tested snapshots and they work as expected.
> 
> However, I'm wondering how the clients should mount without knowing the
> mount names of snapshots. As I see it there are two possibilities:
> 
> 1. Clients get ssh (limited) access to MGS (Don't want that).
> 2. The names are communicated through another channel. Perhaps, written
> to a file on the head Lustre filesystem or just directly to all clients
> that need snapshot mounting through ssh.
> 
> If there isn't a better way, I think number two is the way to go.

You could use automount to mount the snapshots on the clients, when they are 
needed.  The automount map could be created automatically from the snapshot 
list.

Probably it makes the most sense to limit snapshot access to a subset of nodes, 
such as user login nodes, so that users do not try to compute from the snapshot 
filesystems directly.

> Guess the limited length of Lustre fs names is preventing the use of the
> snapshots names directly?

If you rotate the snapshots like Apple Time Machine, you could use generic 
snapshot names like "last_month", "last_week", "yesterday", "6h_ago" and such 
and not have to update the automount map.  The filesystem names could be mostly 
irrelevant if the snapshot mountpoints are chosen properly, like 
"$MOUNT/.snapshot/last_month/" or similar.

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