Thanks for putting this together. Are there any plans for SNS?
On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Andreas Dilger
wrote:
> On 2010-11-01, at 10:21, James Simmons wrote:
>>> due to a number of people asking me for Lustre projects to work on, I
>>> created a list of projects that do not currently ha
stakeholder: Please consider making SNS a top priority. After waiting
several years we (I am sure many others) are migrating to other more
fault tolerant filesystems.
On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 4:25 PM, Norman Morse wrote:
> lustre-discuss@lists.lustre.org
>
> Inaugural OpenSFS Meeting At SC10 To P
On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 05:11:47PM +, Mark Dixon wrote:
> Assuming I do not disable data sieving, which of the following
> options will most likely give me correct behaviour?
>
> 1) Enable Lustre's cluster-wide coherent fcntl locks.
>
I think you're going to have to go with this approach
> 2
On Fri, 5 Nov 2010, Rob Latham wrote:
...
> hello! I'm "the ROMIO guy".
Hi Rob, thanks for replying - good to know the background and that OpenMPI
isn't being left behind!
...
> ROMIO uses these fcntl locks in one place on Lustre: the noncontiguous
> write path uses an optimization called "data
On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 10:18:51AM +, Mark Dixon wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Nov 2010, Martin Pokorny wrote:
> ...
> > FWIW, we've been using MPICH2's MPI-IO/ROMIO/ADIO with Lustre (v 1.8)
> > for several months now, and it's been working reliably. We do mount the
> > Lustre filesystem with "flock"; at
Lustre users,
We've had some hardware and lustre crashes in the recent past, and we are
trying some new hardware configurations for performance and hopefully stability
reasons. To make the changes, we first migrate the data off of the respective
OSTs, and then do the reconfigure, and put the
