McCusker wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 1:14 PM, David Pratt
> wrote:
>> Hi Jim. That is pretty cool. See there are more than 300,000
>> records at
>> present. Curious about how this will work when you get into much
>> larger
>> scale with RAM requireme
Hi Jim. That is pretty cool. See there are more than 300,000 records
at present. Curious about how this will work when you get into much
larger scale with RAM requirement to perform search since this goes up
substantially with lucene as number of docs goes up. I have have
tended to look at
gt;>>
>>> I did some experiments last year with Lustre 1.6.x and a Dell iSCSI
>>> enclosure. It was a little slow (proof of concept mainly) due to
>>> sharing MDT
>>> and OST traffic on a single GigE strand, but as long as the
>>> operating
; enclosure. It was a little slow (proof of concept mainly) due to
> sharing MDT
> and OST traffic on a single GigE strand, but as long as the
> operating system
> presents a valid block device, Lustre works fine.
>
> hth
> Klaus
>
> On 7/31/09 11:13 AM, "Cliff Wh
Hi. I am exploring possibilities for pooled storage for virtual
machines. Lustre looks quite interesting for both tolerance and speed.
I have a couple of basic questions:
1) Can Lustre present an iSCSI target
2) I am looking at physical machines with 4 1TB 24x7 drives in each.
How many mach
