Re: [lustre-discuss] How does Lustre client side caching work?

Yes, our use case would also likely benefit from client-side caching, it wouldn't need to be persistent between reboots, but definitely bigger than what would fit in RAM. For instance, our data set is in the hundreds of terabytes, but a single client at a time accesses maybe 5-10 terabytes, and

Re: [lustre-discuss] How does Lustre client side caching work?

On Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 2:19 AM, Dilger, Andreas wrote: > We have discussed integration of fscache with the Lustre client to allow > persistent cache on NVMe/Optane/NVRAM or other fast local storage. IMHO, > there is little benefit to cache on slower local devices (e.g.

Re: [lustre-discuss] lustre-client is obsoleted

This is a minor problem in the .spec file and has been fixed. The reason for the Obsoletes was to allow installing server RPMs on clients, but it should have only obsoleted older versions. Cheers, Andreas > On Jul 26, 2017, at 10:24, Jon Tegner wrote: > > Hi, > > when

[lustre-discuss] lustre-client is obsoleted

Hi, when trying to update clients from 2.9 to 2.10.0 (on CentOS-7) I received the following: "Package lustre-client is obsoleted by lustre, trying to install lustre-2.10.0-1.el7.x86_64 instead" and then the update failed (to my guessing due to the fact that zfs-related packages are

Re: [lustre-discuss] How does Lustre client side caching work?

Lustre currently only uses RAM for client side cache. This is kept coherent across all clients by the LDLM, but is not persistent across reboots. We have discussed integration of fscache with the Lustre client to allow persistent cache on NVMe/Optane/NVRAM or other fast local storage. IMHO,